IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


I.U     I" 


I.I 


1.25 


_28 

^  m 


1.4 


IIM 

M 

1= 
1.6 


^ 


w 


,%. 


/M 


/a 


o 


/ 


/^ 


Photographic 

Sciences 
Corporation 


23  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  NY.  14580 

(716)  872-4503 


Qp 


<> 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHM/ICMH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  Microreproductions 


Institut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historiques 


1980 


Tschnical  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Notes  techniques  et  bibliographiques 


The  Institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  m^y  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


D 


D 


D 


D 
D 
D 


D 


Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couieur 


□    Covers  damaged/ 
Couverture  endommag^e 


Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaurie  et/ou  pelliculAe 


I      I    Cover  title  missing/ 


Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 

Coloured  maps/ 

Cartes  g^ographiques  en  couieur 


□    Coloured  inl(  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couieur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 


n 


Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 
Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couieur 


Bound  with  other  material/ 
Reiid  avec  d'autres  documents 

Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  reliure  serrde  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
distortion  ie  long  de  la  marge  intirieure 

Blanit  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajout^es 
lors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texte, 
mais,  lorsque  cela  dtait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  6t(t  film6es. 

Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  suppl^mentaires; 


L'Institut  s  mirrofiimA  le  meilleur  exemplaire 
qu'il  lui  a  At£  passible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exemp^<iire  qui  sont  peut-Atre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bi^bliographique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modificetion  dans  la  methods  normale  de  filmage 
sont  indiqu6s  ci-dessous. 


I      I   Coloured  pages/ 


D 
D 


Pages  de  couieur 

Pages  demaged/ 
Pages  endommagies 

Pages  restored  and/o( 

Pages  restauries  et/ou  pellicul6os 

Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxe( 
Pages  d^coior^es.  tacheties  ou  piqu6es 

Pages  detached/ 
Pages  ditachies 

Showthrough/ 
Transparence 

Quality  of  prir 

Qualit^  in6gale  de  I'impression 

Includes  supplementary  materi{ 
Comprend  du  materiel  suppi^mentaire 


I  I  Pages  demaged/ 

I  I  Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 

I  I  Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 

I  I  Pages  detached/ 

r  I  Showthrough/ 

I  I  Quality  of  print  varies/ 

I  I  Includes  supplementary  material/ 


Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Mition  disponible 

Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiellement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  pelure, 
etc.,  ont  4t6  film^es  A  nouveau  de  fa^on  & 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  fiimi  au  taux  de  rMuction  indiquA  ci-dessous. 

10X  14X  18X  22X 


26X 


30X 


y 

12X 


16X 


20X 


24X 


28X 


32X 


The  copy  filmed  here  het  been  reproduced  thenks 
to  the  generosity  off: 

Library  of  the  Public 
Archives  of  Canada 


L'exemplaire  film*  fut  reproduit  grAce  A  la 
gtnirositA  de: 

La  bibliothAque  des  Archives 
publiques  du  Canada 


The  images  sppearing  here  ere  the  best  qusllty 
possible  considering  the  condition  end  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  Iceeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  .j<e  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  bacit  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustreted  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  lest  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  -^  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  the  symbol  y  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 

Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


Les  images  suivantes  ont  4tA  reproduites  avec  Ee 
plus  grand  soin.  compte  tenu  de  la  condition  at 
de  la  nettetA  de  l'exemplaire  fiim6,  et  en 
conformity  avec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 

Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprimie  sont  film6s  en  commanpant 
par  la  premier  plat  et  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
derniire  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration.  soit  par  le  second 
plat,  salon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  filmis  en  commengant  par  la 
premiere  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration  et  en  terminant  par 
la  dernlAre  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 

Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparattra  sur  la 
derniire  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  seion  le 
cas:  le  eymboie  — ►  signifie  "A  SUIVRE  ".  le 
symbols  V  signifie  "FIN  ". 

Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc..  peuvent  Atre 
film  As  A  des  taux  de  rAduction  diffArents. 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  Atre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  clichA,  il  est  filmA  A  partir 
de  I'angle  supAfieur  gauche,  de  gauche  A  droite. 
et  de  haut  en  bes.  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  nAcessaire.  Les  diagrammes  suivants 
illustrent  la  mAthode. 


1 

2 

3 

t 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

;» 


fi 


481 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN 


A  PARALLEL  IN  PLANES  OF  CULTURE 


, 


;»l 


BY 


GARRIOK  MALLERY 


REPRINTED  FROM  THE  POPULAR  SCIENCE  MONTHLY 
FOR  NOVEMBER  AND  DECEMBER,   18S9 


% 


NEW    YORK 
D.    APPLETON    AND    COMPANY 

1889 


\m 


(.iwi 


^1 


fl 


r 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN:   A  PARALLEL   IN   PLANES 

OF  CULTURE.* 
Bt  garrick  mallery. 

I. 

AXIOMS  and  postulates  long  limited  man's  study  of  man. 
This  hampering  has  been  peculiarly  marked  in  reference 
to  America,  the  assumption  being  that  it  must  have  been  peopled 
from  the  eastern  hemisphere,  and  that  its  languages,  religions, 
and  customs  must  have  beon  inherited  from  nations  registered  in 
Eurasian  records.  Whatever  was  found  here  was  assumed  to 
have  come  through  descent  or  derivation.  The  conceptions  of 
autogeny  and  of  independent  growth,  by  which  men  in  the  same 
plane  of  culture  act  and  think  alike,  with  only  the  modificauv  us 
of  environment,  had  not  arisen  to  explain  observed  facts. 

Many  authors  have  contended  that  the  Noi  th  American  Indians 
were  descendants  of  the  "  ten  lost  tribes  of  Israel."  Prominent 
among  them  was  James  Adair,  whose  work,  highly  useful  with 
regard  to  the  customs  of  the  southeastern  Indians,  among  whom 
he  spent  many  years,  was  mainly  devoted  to  proof  of  the  proposi- 
tion. The  Rev.  Ethan  Smith  is  also  conspicuous.  Even  the  latest 
general  treatise  on  the  Indians,  published  last  year,  and  bearing 
the  comprehensive  title,  "  The  American  Indian,"  favors  the  same 
theory. 

The  authors  of  the  school  mentioned  rest  their  case  on  the 
fact,  which  I  freely  admit  with  greater  emphasis,  that  an  astound- 
ing number  of  customs  of  the  North  American  Indians  are  the 
same  as  those  recorded  of  the  ancient  Israelites.  The  lesson  to 
be  derived  from  this  parallel  is,  however,  very  different  from  that 
drawn  by  t^ose  who  have  advocated  the  descent  in  question. 

The  argument,  strongly  urged,  derived  from  an  alleged  simi- 
larity between  Hebrew  and  some  Indian  languages,  especially  in 
identity  of  certain  vocables,  may  be  dismissed  forthwith.  Per- 
haps the  most  absurd  of  all  the  coincidences  insisted  upon  by 
Adair  was  the  religious  use  of  sounds  represented  by  him  to  be 
the  same  as  the  word  Jehovah.  The  "  lost "  Israelites  when  de- 
ported did  not  use  orally  the  name  given  in  the  English  version 
as  "  Jehovah,"  and  the  mode  of  its  spelling  and  pronunciation  is 
at  this  moment  in  dispute,  though  generally  accepted  as  Jahveh ; 
therefore,  it  would  be  most  extraordinary  if  the  tribes  of  Indians 
supposed  to  be  descendants  of  the  I'^st  ten  tribes  of  Israel  should 
at  this  time  know  how  to  pronounce  a  name  which  their  alleged 
ancestors  practically  did  not  possess. 

•  Address  of  the  Vice-President  of  tlie  American  Association  for  the  Advancement  of 
g-ience,  Section  H,  Anthropology,  delivered  at  the  Toronto  meeting,  August,  1889. 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


Fatlicr  Lafiteau  was  so  much  excited  by  coincidence  in  sound 
of  some  of  the  Iroquoian  names  and  expressions  with  the  language 
of  the  ancient  inhabitants  of  Thrace  and  Lycia  that  lie  ba«ed 
thereon  a  theory  of  descent.  On  similar  grounds  ancestors  of  the 
Indians  have  been  found  among  the  Phoenicians,  Scandinavians, 
Welsh,  Irish,  Carthaginians,  Egyptians,  Tartars,  Hindus,  Malays, 
Chinese,  Japanese,  and  all  the  islanders  of  Polynesia.  It  is  not 
wonderful  that,  with  the  choice  of  three  hundred  Indian  lan- 
guages, besides  their  dialects,  from  which  to  make  selections  of 
sounds,  some  one  should  be  likened  to  some  other  language,  for 
all  spoken  languages  can  in  that  manner— i.  e.,  by  a  comparison  of 
vocables — show  identity  of  sound  and  a  percentage  of  coincidences 
of  significance.  Philology  now  applies  more  discriminating  rules 
of  comparison. 

But  all  arguments  that  the  Indians  are  descended  from  the 
"  lost  tribes  "  are  demolished  by  the  fact,  now  generally  accepted, 
that  those  tribes  were  not  lost,  but  that  most  of  their  members 
were  deported  and  absorbed,  their  traces  remaining  during  centu- 
ries, and  that  others  fled  to  Jerusalem  and  Egypt.  If  any  large 
number  of  them  had  remained  in  a  body,  and  had  migrated  at  a 
time  long  before  the  Columbian  discovery,  but  later  than  the 
capture  of  Samaria  in  the  seventh  century  b.  c,  their  journey 
from  Mesopotamia  to  North  America  would  have  required  the 
assistance  of  miracles  that  have  not  been  suggested  except  in  the 
Book  of  Mormon. 

For  bi'evity,  the  term  "Indians"  may  be  used — leaving  the 
blunder  of  Columbus  where  it  beh  ngs — without  iterating  their 
designation  as  North  American,  though  I  shall  not  treat  of  the 
aboriginal  inhabitants  south  of  the  United  States.  This  neglect 
of  Mexico  and  Central  and  South  America  is  not  only  to  observe 
my  own  limits,  but  because  some  of  the  peoples  of  those  regions 
had  reached  a  culture  stage  in  advance  of  the  northern  tribes. 
To  avoid  confusion,  the  terra  "  Israelites  "  may  designate  all  the 
nation.  Although  the  tribes  became  divided  into  the  kingdoms 
of  Israel  and  of  Judah,  when  it  is  necessary  to  speak  of  the  north- 
ern tribes  they  may  be  designated  as  the  kingdom  of  Samaria. 
The  shortest  term,  Jews,  would  be  incorrect,  as  the  people  now 
scattered  over  the  world  and  called  "  Jews "  are  chiefly  the  de- 
scendants of  the  southern  branch  or  fractional  part  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel,  and  have  a  special  history  beyond  that  common  to 
them  and  their  congeners. 

The  parallel  presented  is  not  selected  because  its  two  counter- 
parts are  more  similar  to  each  other  than  either  of  them  is  to  other 
bodies  of  people  among  the  races  of  the  earth.  A  similar  parallel 
can  be  drawn  between  both  the  Indians  and  the  Israelites  and  the 
Aryan  peoples,  from  which  I  and  most  of  my  hearers  are  supposed 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


% 


to  have  descended.  Tlie  selection  is  made  for  convenience,  because 
this  audience  is  assumed  to  he  familiar  with  the  Old  Testament, 
so  that  quotations  and  citations  from  it  are  less  necessary ;  and 
also  because  many  of  them  in  this,  the  Anthropoloj^ic  Section,  are 
familiar  with  the  Indians,  so  that  the  collocation  of  facts  without 
a  prolix  statement  is  sufticient  for  comparison. 

Although  the  Indians  are  divided  into  fifty-eight  linguistic 
stocks  and  three  hundred  languages,  and  although  there  is  great 
variety  in  their  manners,  customs,  and  traditions,  yet  there  is  suf- 
ficient generic  resemblance  between  all  of  them  to  afford  typical 
instances,  where  European  civilization  and  missionary  influence 
have  not  effected  serious  change,  or  where  the  early  authorities  are 
reliable.  It  is  essential  to  examine  the  other  side  of  the  parallul 
— the  Israelites — at  a  period  coincident  in  development  with  that 
of  the  Indians.  That  part  of  the  history  and  records  of  the  Israel- 
ites must  be  chiefly  considered  which  relates  to  the  times  before 
they  had  formed  a  nationality  and  had  become  sedentary.  The 
general  use  of  writing  was  nearly  contemporaneous  with  that 
nationality,  and  the  era  of  King  David  is  a  i)roper  demarkating 
line.  The  Indians  never  having  arrived  at  the  stage  of  nation- 
ality, though  some  of  them  (as  the  Iroquois  and  the  Muskoki) 
were  far  on  the  road  to  it,  and  never  having  acquired  a  written 
language,  their  stage  of  culture  at  the  Columbian  discovery  shows 
a  degree  of  development  comparable  with  that  of  the  Israelite 
patriarchal  period  and  the  early  Canaanito  occupation  before  the 
rule  of  kings. 

It  is  important  to  establish  the  time  when  writing  was  first 
known  among  the  Israelites,  because  then  their  traditions  would 
first  become  fixed.  No  reliable  history  can  exist  before  writing. 
An  illiterate  people  remembers  only  fables  and  myths ;  from  these 
the  history  of  the  years  before  writing  was  used  must  be  win- 
nowed. There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  the  Hebrew  language 
was  written  at  the  time  of  the  exodus,  though  some  such  mnemon- 
ic system  might  have  been  invented  as  was  used  by  several  of  the 
Indian  tribes.  If  Moses  had  all  the  knowledge  of  the  Egyptians, 
but  no  more,  he  could  not  have  used  any  better  mode  of  writing 
than  their  hieratic,  in  which  it  was  not  possible  to  write  intelligibly 
any  long  document  in  the  Hebrew  language,  sim])ly  because  the 
advance  made  by  the  hieratic,  in  which  the  use  of  phonetics  be- 
gan, was  not  sufficient  to  express  all  the  Hebrew  vocables. 

There  has  been  an  attempt  to  show  that  the  old  Hebrew  alpha- 
bet, which  has  been  classed  as  partly  Phoenician  and  partly  Baby- 
lonian, was  obtained  from  Assyria  at  a  time  before  the  exodus, 
but  the  proposition  is  not  yet  established.  Even  if  Assyrian 
characters  adaptable  to  the  Hebrew  language  did  then  exist,  it  is 
not  probable  that  the  Israelite  herdsmen  and  bcmdmen  did  so 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


adapt  ihoiu.  If  any  one  of  thorn — o.  jij.,  Mohos — liad  done  so  as  an 
individual  act,  tho  feat  would  have  had  l)ut  one  historic  parallel, 
■which  would  have  furinsht'd  another  coincidence  between  Israel- 
ite and  Indian.  It  was  performed  by  the  Cheroki,  Sequoia,  who 
in  less  i)rosaic  days  would  have  become  the  hero  of  a  Kadmos 
myth.  But  SiMjuoia  left  very  distinct  marks  of  his  invention, 
while  there  is  no  evidence  that  the  Israelites  possessed  an  alpha- 
bet before  they  settled  in  Canaan,  and  there  are  strong  inferences 
against  that  sui)i)osition. 

The  compilers  of  the  Old  Testament  felt  no  doubt  that  the  Ihw 
could  have  been  written  on  Sinai  at  the  time  of  the  exodus.  They 
knew  how  to  write  and  knew  that  their  predecessors  for  several 
generations  had  written,  so  it  did  not  occur  to  them  that  there 
had  ever  been  a  time  in  which  persons  of  the  liigher  classes  were 
ignorant  of  writing. 

It  is  probable  that  in  the  days  of  Samuel  the  Israelites  had 
made  some  progress  in  the  art  of  writing.  An  alphabet  had  been 
known  to  some  of  them  before ;  but  its  commoi;  use  is  of  greater 
consequence,  and  that  depends  much  upon  the  substances  used  for 
writing,  their  cost,  and  the  convenience  of  procuring  them.  The 
use,  not  the  mere  invention,  of  writing,  not  only  divides  the  mythi- 
cal and  the  historical  periods,  but  reacts  upon  the  character  of  the 
people  in  all  their  institutions,  forming  a  new  epoch  in  culture. 
The  people  did,  perhai)s,  write  under  David  at  about  1100  B.  c. 

Moses  flourished  about  fifteen  centuries  before  Christ,  and  the 
oldest  legends  relating  to  him  are,  in  their  present  shape,  four  or 
five  centuries  later  than  his  death.  He  did  not  practically  organ- 
ize a  new  formal  state  of  society,  or  if  he  did,  temporarily,  by  his 
personal  power,  it  had  no  direct  consequence  or  historical  continu- 
ity. The  old  system  of  clans  and  religions  continued  as  before.  If 
the  legislative  portion  of  the  Pentateuch  was  the  work  of  Moses, 
it  remained  a  dead  letter  for  centuries,  and  not  until  the  reign  of 
Josiah  did  it  become  operative  in  the  national  history. 

The  historical  account  undoubtedly  states  that  Moses  was,  by 
inspiration,  the  founder  of  the  Torah  ;  but  the  question  is,  What 
was  that  Torah  ?  It  was  not  the  finished  legislative  code.  Long 
after  the  exodus  a  dramatic  account  was  furnished  of  the  pro- 
mulgation of  the  whole  law  at  Sinai  to  produce  a  solemn  impres- 
sion, and  thus  the  code,  which  had  slowly  and  imperceptibly 
grown  during  centuries,  was  represented  as  having  been  pro- 
nounced on  one  occasion  celebrated  by  tradition  as  momentous. 

The  code  now  ascribed  to  Moses  was  a  revised  code,  and  in  an 
unusual  sense  a  mosaic  work.  When  the  Israelites  attained  the 
use  of  writing  they  did  as  all  people  in  the  world  have  done  when 
they  began  to  use  writing— i.  e.,  they  wrote  out  their  own  myths, 
traditions,  and  legends  as  they  knew  them  at  the  time  of  writing. 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN, 


4| 


But  during  the  long  time  in  which  the  traditions  wore  tninsmittod 
orally,  the  growth  of  the  nation's  ideas  j)roducod  a  change  in 
them  without  any  fabrication  or  design,  and  it  is  probahh'  that 
the  traditions  affected  only  to  this  extent  were  set  forth  in  the 
earlier  documents,  long  since  lost,  namely,  the  "  Book  of  the  Wars 
of  Jahveh  "  and  the  "  Jasar."  There  were,  however,  special  ttjmp- 
tations  in  the  later  history  of  Israel,  in  the  contests  between  the 
Elohists  and  the  Jahvists,  to  manipulate  the  earlier  documents. 
When  the  compilers  belonging  to  the  two  schools  produced  the 
two  versions,  intermixed  and  confused  in  the  books  we  now  have, 
they  differed  from  all  people  in  history  if  the  contestants,  for  po- 
litical and  personal  power,  did  not  color  the  records  to  suit  their 
own  views. 

Students  who  have  devoted  their  lives  to  the  study  of  the  last 
compilation  have  been  able  to  identify,  by  linguistic  and  historical 
exegesis,  the  fragments  of  the  original  traditions,  the  epic  tales  of 
the  first  documents,  the  theocratic  deductions  and  the  later  sacer- 
dotal visions,  though  the  two  versions  appear  on  the  same  page 
and  sometimes  in  the  same  paragraph.  The  results  of  this  im- 
mense labor  by  the  Hebraists  of  this  generation  have  lately  been 
presented  by  Renan  in  a  popular  form.  His  works,  as  well  as 
those  of  other  authors  whose  names  will  be  mentioned  in  this  ad- 
dress, I  have  used  freely,  though  generally  without  exact  quotation. 

In  addition  to  the  linguistic  and  historical  tests,  other  internal 
evidences,  especially  the  antedating  of  conceptions  several  centu- 
ries (some  instances  of  which  will  be  mentioned),  show  that  the 
books,  as  now  presented,  were  written  long  after  the  periods  re- 
ferred to  in  them. 

The  main  document  on  the  primitive  age  is  the  Book  of  Gene- 
sis, regarded  for  the  reasons  mentioned,  not  as  literally  historical, 
but  as  the  tradition,  written  at  a  respectable  antiquity,  of  an  age 
that  really  existed.  In  examining  it  the  historical  part  is  discov- 
ered, not  by  belief  in  the  miraculous,  but  by  the  proper  compre- 
hension of  the  mythical. 

Much  can  be  learned  from  myths  and  legends  of  the  times  an- 
terior to  strict  history.  The  Homeric  epics  are  not  history,  yet 
they  throw  a  flood  of  light  upon  Greek  life  a  millennium  before 
the  Christian  era.  The  ante-Islam  tales  and  the  Arthurian  and 
Niebelungen  romances  of  the  middle  ages  are  not  true  in  fact,  yet 
they  are  storehouses,  preserving  the  social  life  of  the  days  when 
they  were  composed  and  to  a  less  though  still  useful  degree  of  the 
time  embraced  by  the  still  earlier  traditions.  The  generalizations 
derived  from  the  details  of  ancient  texts  are  truths  obtained  by 
induction. 

It  is  expedient  to  make  a  disclaimer  before  entering  upon  the 
necessary  comparisons  of  religions.    I  absolutely  repudiate  any 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


uttuck  upon  any  r(>li^^ioii.  Let  uh  leurn  h  lesBun  from  the  Indians, 
not  only  in  tolorunce  hut  in  politenosH.  Ono  of  tlio  early  Juauit 
niissionaries  in  Ciuuula  recounts  how  ho  pleawed  a  Huron  chief  by 
luH  discourse  ui)on  the  cosmology  set  forth  in  the  Scriptures,  and 
felt  that  he  had  secured  a  convert  until  the  ch.ief,  thanking  him 
for  his  information,  added,  "  Now  you  have  told  me  how  your 
world  was  made,  I  will  tell  you  how  my  world  was  made";  and 
proceeded  to  give  tlu!  now  familiar  story  of  the  woman  falling 
from  the  sky,  and  the  turtle.  He  was  willing  that  the  priest  should 
retain  his  belief,  with  which  his  own,  in  his  opinion,  did  not  con- 
flict. Dr.  Franklin  tells  of  a  Susquehannock  who,  after  a  similar 
lecture  from  a  Swedish  missionary,  was  answered  in  the  same 
manner ;  but  this  missionary  became  angry  and  interrupted  tlie 
Indian,  whereupon  the  latter  solemnly  rebuked  him  with  pity;  "I 
have  listened  politely  to  what  you  told  me  ;  if  you  had  been  prop- 
erly brought  up,  you  would  have  believed  me  as  I  believed  you." 

Religion,  as  accurately  defined,  embraces  only  the  perficient 
relations  between  divinity  and  man,  and  the  mode  in  which  such 
relations  operate.  Poi)ularly  it  includes  cosmology  and  theology. 
For  present  convenience- the  broad  subject  may  be  divided  into 
Religious  Opinions  and  Religious  Practices. 

In  this  comparison,  all  religious  views  person fJly  entertained 
must  be  laid  aside  and  the  study  conducted  strictly  within  the 
scope  of  anthropology.  Modern  thinkers  adopt  the  rule  not  to 
use  a  miraculous  factor  when  unnecessary.  Nee  deus  intersit, 
nisi  dignus  vindice  nodus.  It  is  now  regarded  as  puerile  to  ex- 
plain all  puzzling  phenomena,  as  was  done  for  ages — 

"  When  solved  complete  was  any  portent  odd 
By  one  more  story  or  another  god." 

This  attitude,  however,  is  still  not  universal.  When  experi- 
ence of  observed  facts  and  of  the  orderly  working  of  the  forces  of 
nature  are  not  sufficient  for  explanation,  some  minds  yet  resort  to 
the  miraculous.  Others  huml)ly  confess  ignorance  and  work  for 
light.  This  light  when  gained  is  real  and  lasting,  not  the  delusive 
hues  of  cloud-region,  varying  with  each  instant  and  to  each  ob- 
server's eye,  and  soon  resolving  into  the  same  old  mists  and  fogs 
from  which  escape  was  sought. 

In  their  explanation  of  phenomena,  all  the  peoples  of  the  world 
have  resorted  to  revelations.  Every  myth  or  early  teaching  is 
directly  or  indirectly  through  revelation  ;  but  as  the  revelation  is 
on  both  sides  of  the  equation,  it  can  be  eliminated  from  any  paral- 
lel such  as  is  now  presented. 

A  cardinal  of  more  than  titular  eminence  was  rash  when,  ad- 
mitting that  the  doctrine  of  the  devil  and  his  command  of  demons 
was  first  learned  by  the  Israelites  during  the  Babylonian  captiv- 


IHRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


ity,  he  insisted  that  it  mi^ht  ])o  divine  rcvj'latiDn,  notwithstanding? 
its  imniodiate  source.  He  said  that  if  (iod  nuuh*  Bahiam's  asB 
speak,  it  would  also  he  easy  for  him  to  urovicUi  that  the  hcatlun 
should  give  correct  instruction.  The  non-«*xistenco  of  Satan  is 
not  demonstrahle ;  so  it  may  he  well  to  examine  into  suhjects  on 
which  we  liave  knowledge,  such  as  geology  and  astronomy.  It 
appears  from  bricks  in  palaces  at  Nineveh  that  tiie  Mosaic  cosmol- 
ogy was  also  obtained  from  the  same  source  as  the  Satanic  doctrine. 
Any  revelation  on  the  subject  would  in  order  of  time  have  been 
given  to,  and  according  to  all  evidence  was  i)romulgated  by,  the 
cultured  Assyrians,  not  the  ignorant  captives.  The  i)riority, 
however,  is  of  little  moment,  as  the  revolving  dish-cover  theory, 
whether  as  originally  noted  on  clay  or  on  rolls  of  sheep-skin,  is 
now  obsolete.  All  dependence  on  revelations  practically  means  that 
those  suiting  us  are  true  and  all  others  fals(?.  When  judgment 
upon  the  truth  or  falsehood  of  an  alleged  revelation  can  be  made 
in  accordance  with  the  prejudices  of  the  judge,  the  subject  be- 
comes too  eclectic  and  elastic  to  be  considered  by  science,  or  indeed 
by  common  sense. 

The  scope  of  anthropology  is  to  study  within  the  category  of 
humanity.  If  theology  comes  from  man's  conceptions,  it  is  em- 
braced in  anthropology.  If  theology  is  of  divine  origin,  anthro- 
pology may  discuss  what  men  think  and  do  about  it.  But  the 
truth  or  falsity  of  revelation  can  not  be  dealt  with  in  this  ad- 
dress.   To  raise  that  point  acts  as  a  cloture y  cutting  off  all  debate. 

Religious  Opinions. — Religious  writers  have  often  explained 
the  differences  in  beliefs  among  the  various  peoples  of  the  world 
on  the  hypothesis  that  true  religious  knowledge  was  implanted  at 
one  time  in  the  ancestors  of  all  those  peoples,  and  that  the  diver- 
gence now  found  is  through  decay  of  that  supernatural  informa- 
tion. The  early  missionaries  to  America,  of  all  denominations, 
were  imbued  with  this  dogma  and  sought,  and  therefore  found, 
evidences  of  the  one  primeval  faith.  Sometimes  they  limited  them- 
selves to  the  similar  beliefs  of  the  Indians  and  the  Israelites,  but 
often  they  passed  beyond  that  stage  to  locate  the  vestiges  of  Chris- 
tianity. These  they  said  came  by  the  hands  of  Christian  pre- 
Columbian  visitors,  and  one  explanation  was  by  the  importation 
of  the  apostle  Thomas.  The  coincidences  found  were  exagger- 
ated, but  when  facts  were  opposed  they  were  not  less  satisfactory, 
as  the  adverse  power  of  Satan  then  appeared.  Such  mental  prede- 
termination nearly  destroys  the  value  of  those  nnssionary  accounts. 

The  most  generally  entertained  parallel  between  the  Indians 
and  the  Israelites,  repeated  by  hundreds  of  writers,  was  that  they 
both  believed  in  one  overruling  God.  This  consensus,  if  true, 
would  at  once  establish  a  beatific  bridge  of  union  between  the  two 
peoples,  but  its  iris  arch  vanishes  as  it  is  viewed  closely. 


lO 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


After  careful  examination,  with  tlie  assistance  of  explorers  and 
linguists,  I  reassert  my  statement,  published  twelve  years  ago,  that 
no  tribe  or  body  of  Indians,  before  missionary  influence,  enter- 
tained any  formulated  or  distinct  belief  in  a  single,  overruling 
*'  Great  Spirit,"  or  any  being  corresponding  to  the  later  Israelite 
or  tlie  Christian  conception  of  God.  All  the  statements  of  the 
missionaries  and  early  travelers  to  the  opposite  effect  are  errone- 
ous. Even  some  of  the  earliest  writers  discovered  this  truth. 
Lafiteau  says  that  the  names  "Oki  "  and  "  Manito"  were  given  to 
various  spirits  and  genii.  Champlain  said  that  Oki  was  a  name 
given  to  a  man  more  valiant  and  skillful  than  common,  Manito 
signifies  "  something  beyond  comprehension/'  A,  simke  was  often 
a  manito,  and  seldom  were  snakes  molested.  "Hawaneu,"  re- 
duced to  correct  vocables,  only  means  loud-voiced — i.  e.,  thunder. 
**  Kitchi  Manito  "  is  not  a  proper  name  for  one  god,  but  an  appella- 
tion of  an  entire  class  of  great  spirits.  So  with  the  Dakota  term 
**  Wakan,"  which  means  only  the  mysterious  unknown.  A  watch 
is  a  wakan.  The  Chahta  word  presented  as  "God"  for  two  centu- 
ries is  now  found  to  mean  a  "  high  hill." 

Some  Indians,  perhaps,  had  a  vague  idea  of  some  good  spirit  or 
being  whom  they  did  not  worship  and  to  whom  they  did  not  pray. 
They  prayed  and  sacrificed  to  the  active  daimons,  concerning 
whom  they  had  many  myths.  In  their  various  cosmologic  myths 
there  was  sometimes  a  vague  and  unformulated  being  who  started 
the  machinery  by  which  the  myth  proceeded ;  but  when  once 
started  no  further  attention  was  paid  to  such  originator.  Per- 
haps some  modern  advanced  thinkers  have  no  clearer  definition 
of  a  great  first  cause. 

Praise  has  been  lavished  upon  the  Indians  because  they  did 
not  take  the  name  of  God  in  vain.  The  true  statement,  however, 
has  a  different  significance.  Thf^y  did  not,  according  to  the  best 
linguistic  scholars,  have  any  word  corresponding  with  the  English 
"  God  "  either  to  use  or  misuse,  and  they  deserve  no  more  praise 
for  avoidance  of  profanity  than  for  their  total  abstinence  from 
alcoholic  drinks  before  such  had  been  invented  or  imported.  The 
terms  too  liberally  translated  as  "  Master  of  Life  "  and  "  Maker  of 
Breath  "were  epithets  merely.  Perhaps  there  was  an  approach 
to  a  title  of  veneration  when  the  method  of  their  clan  system  was 
applied  to  supernatural  persons,  among  whom  there  would  natu- 
rally be  a  chief  or  great  father  of  the  "beast  gods,"  on  the  same 
principle  as  there  was  a  chieftaincy  in  tribes. 

The  missionaries  who  have  persistently  found  what  did  not 
exist  are  not  without  excuse.  Wholly  independent  of  any  design 
to  force  welcome  answers,  an  interviewer  who  asks  a  leading  ques- 
tion of  an  Indian  can  always  obtain  the  answer  which  is  supposed 
to  be  desired.    The  sole  safe  mode  of  reaching  the  Indian's  men- 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


11 


tal  attitude  is  to  let  him  tell  his  myths  and  make  his  remarks  in 
his  own  way  and  in  his  own  language.  When  such  texts  are 
written  out,  translated,  and  studied  they  are  of  great  value.  It 
is  only  within  about  twelve  years  that  this  has  been  done  in  a 
systematic  manner,  but  it  has  already  resulted  in  the  correction 
of  many  popular  errors. 

In  attempting  to  translate  the  epithets  mentioned,  the  mis- 
sionaries and  travelers  often  honestly  used  the  word  which,  in  their 
own  conception,  was  the  nearest  equivalent.  An  instructive  ex- 
ample is  where  Boscana  describes  a  structure  in  southern  Cali- 
fornia as  a  "  temple."  It  was  a  circular  fence,  six  feet  high,  not 
roofed  in — a  mere  plaza  for  dancing ;  but  the  dancing  was  reli- 
gious, and  the  word  "  temple  "  was  the  best  one  he  could  find,  by 
which  mistake  he  has  perplexed  archaeologists  who  have  sought 
in  vain  for  the  ruins. 

A  consideration  not  often  weighed  is  that  the  only  members 
of  the  Indian  tribes  who  are  willing  to  give  their  own  ideas  on 
religious  matters  to  foreigners  are  precisely  those  who  are  most 
intelligent  and  most  dissatisfied  with  their  old  stories.  There 
were  minds  among  them  groping  after  something  newer  and  bet- 
ter, and  it  would  be  easy  to  translate  their  vague  longings  into 
the  conception  of  an  overruling  Providence.  But  the  people  had 
made  no  such  advance. 

The  missionaries  who  announced  that  the  Indians  were  fixed 
in  the  belief  in  one  god  were  much  troubled  by  the  statement  of 
the  converted  native,  Hiaccomes,  of  Martha's  Vineyard,  who,  hav- 
ing enumerated  his  thirty-seven  gods,  gave  them  all  up.  This, 
however,  was  a  typical  instance  of  the  truth.  The  Indians  had  an 
indefinite  number  of  so-called  gods  corresponding  with  the  like 
indefinite  number  of  the  Elohim  of  the  Israelites  before  the  su- 
premacy of  Jahveh. 

The  biblical  religion  of  Israel  has  been  popularly  hold  to  be 
coeval  with  the  world,  but  its  own  beginning  was  by  no  means 
archaic.  About  a  thousand  years  before  Christ  i  t  did  not  exist, 
and  at  least  four  hundred  years  were  required  for  its  develop- 
ment. The  religious  practices  of  David  and  Solomon  did  not 
materially  differ  from  those  of  their  neighbors  in  Palestine.  Not 
until  the  time  of  Hezekiah,  about  seven  hundred  and  twenty-five 
years  before  Christ,  did  the  Israelite  religion  attain  to  a  distinct 
formulation.  Its  ordinances  and  beliefs  advanced  from  crudity 
and  mutation  to  ripeness  and  establishment.  It  was  a  system 
long  in  growth,  and  so  could  not  early  possess  authoritative  docn- 
ments. 

The  nomad  Semite  believed,  with  other  barbarians,  that  he 
lived  amid  a  supernatural  environment.  The  world  was  sur- 
rounded and  governed  by  the  Elohim— myriads  of  active  beings, 


ta 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


seldom  with  distinct  proper  names,  so  that  it  was  easy  to  regard 
them  as  a  whole  and  confound  them  togetlier.  Yet  the  power 
bore  different  names  in  different  tribes.  In  some  cases  it  was 
called  El,  or  Alon,  or  Eloali ;  in  other  cases  Elion,  Saddai,  Baal, 
Adonai,  Ram,  Milik  or  Moloch. 

The  Elohim,  tliough  generally  bound  together,  sometimes  acted 
separately ;  thus  each  tribe  gained  in  time  its  protecting  god, 
whose  function  was  to  watch  over  it  and  direct  it  to  success. 

In  the  transition  to  nationality,  the  Israelites  conceived  a  na- 
tional god,  Jaliveli.  who  was  not  just,  being  ])artial  toward  Israel 
and  criH'l  toward  all  other  peo})les.  The  worship  of  a  national 
god  is  not  monotheistic,  but  henotheistic,  recognizing  other  gods 
of  other  peoples.  The  work  of  the  later  prophets  consisted  in 
restoring  the  attributes  of  the  ancient  elohism  under  the  foi-m 
of  Jahveh,  and  in  generalizing  the  religious  cult  of  a  special  god. 

Jahveh  was  not  at  first  the  god  of  the  universe,  but  subse- 
quently became  so  because  he  was  the  God  of  Israel,  and  very 
long  afterward  was  claimed  to  be  the  only  god,  mainly  because 
the  Israelites  claimed  to  be  the  peculiar  people.  Even  down  to 
the  time  of  the  prophet  Isaiah,  there  was  alternation  of  conflict 
and  of  co-ordination  between  Jahveh  and  the  other  gods  of  Canaan, 
especially  Baal. 

The  revolution  accomplished  by  the  prophets  did  not  change 
expressions.  The  concept  of  Jahveh  was  too  deeply  rooted  to  be 
removed,  and  the  people  spoke  of  Jahveh  as  they  had  formerly 
spoken  of  the  Elohim.  He  thus  became  the  supreme  being  who 
made  and  governed  the  w^orld.  In  time  even  the  name  of  Jahveh 
was  suppressed  and  its  utterance  forbidden ;  and  it  was  replaced 
by  a  purely  theistic  word  meaning  the  Lord.  Undoubtedly  the 
prophets,  at  the  time  of  tlie  kings  and  later,  taught  the  worship 
of  one  God,  but  the  people  were  not  converted  to  the  doctrine  un- 
til after  the  great  captivity. 

When  established  in  Palestine,  the  Israelites  entered  into  com- 
munion with  the  Canaanites,  their  kindred,  and  worshiped  Baal. 
Later  they  frequently  bowed  down  to  the  Dagon  of  the  Philistines, 
probably  because  he  was  the  god  of  their  warlike  victors.  Solo- 
mon, perhaps  from  admiration  of  Sidonian  culture,  introduced  the 
service  of  Astarte,  which  was  intermitted ;  but  later,  Ahab  estab- 
lished the  worship  of  tlip  Sidonian  divinities  in  the  kingdom  of 
Samaria.  It  was  subsequently  readopted  in  the  kingdom  of  Judah, 
and  not  until  the  reign  of  Josiah  were  the  Sidonian  altars  finally 
demolished. 

The  true  parallel,  therefore,  between  the  Indians  and  the 
Israelites,  as  to  belief  in  a  single  overruling  God,  is  not  that  both, 
but  that  neither,  held  it. 

In  the  stage  of  barbarism  all  the  phenomena  of  nature  are 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN, 


«3 


attributed  to  the  animals  by  which  man  is  surrounded,  or  rather 
to  the  ancestral  types  of  these  animals,  which  are  worshiped. 
This  is  the  religion  of  zootheisni.  Throughout  the  world,  when 
advance  was  made  from  this  plane,  it  was  to  a  stage  in  which  the 
powers  and  phenomena  of  nature  are  personified  and  deified.  In 
this  stage  the  gods  are  anthropomorphic,  having  the  mental, 
moral,  and  social  attributes  of  men,  and  represented  under  the 
forms  of  men.  This  is  the  religion  of  physitheism.  The  most 
advanced  of  the  Indian  tribes  showed  evidence  of  transition  from 
zootheism  to  physitheism.  The  Israelites,  in  the  latter  part  of 
the  period  selected,  showed  the  same  transition  in  a  somewhat 
higher  degree  than  the  Indians  did  when  their  independent  prog- 
ress was  arrested. 

It  is  needless  to  enlarge  upon  the  animal  gods  of  the  Indians, 
or  to  furnish  evidence  that  they  gave  some  vague  worship  to  the 
sun,  the  lightning,  to  fire  and  winds. 

There  is  no  doubt  that  the  Israelites  were  for  a  long  period  in 
the  stage  of  zoolatry.  They  persisted  in  the  worship  of  animal 
gods — the  golden  calf,  the  brazen  serpent,  the  fish-god,  and  the 
fly-god.  The  second  commandment  is  explicitly  directed  against 
the  worship  of  the  daimons  of  air,  earth,  and  water,  which  is 
known  to  have  been  common ;  and  the  existence  of  the  prohibition 
shows  the  necessity  for  it,  especially  as  it  was  formulated,  after 
the  practice  had  existed  for  centuries,  by  a  religious  party  which 
sought  to  abolish  that  worship. 

The  god  of  Sinai  was  a  god  of  storm  and  lightning,  which 
phenomena  were  strange  to  the  Israelites  after  their  sojourn  in 
plains.  The  ancient  local  god  of  the  Canaanites  began  in  the 
exodus  to  affect  the  religious  concepts  of  the  Israelites,  so  that 
they  associated  Jahveh  with  the  god  whose  lands  they  were  plant- 
ing and  whose  influence  they  felt.  Sinai  was  thenceforward  the 
locality  of  their  theology.  Jahveh,  through  all  after-changes, 
remained  there  as  his  home ;  he  spoke  with  the  voice  of  thunder, 
and  never  appeared  without  storm  and  earthquake. 

Another  class  of  gods  connected  with  beast-worship  and  also 
with  the  totemic  institution  (to  be  hereafter  specially  noted)  was 
tutelar,  the  special  cult  of  tribes,  clans,  and  individuals.  It  was 
conspicuous  both  among  the  Israelites  and  the  Indians. 

Jahveh  may  first  have  been  a  clan  or  tribal  god,  either  of  the 
clan  to  which  Moses  belonged  or  of  the  clan  of  Joseph,  in  the  pos- 
session of  which  was  the  ark.  No  essential  distinction  was  felt  to 
exist  between  Jahveh  and  El,  any  more  than  between  Ashur  and  El. 
Jahveh  was  only  a  special  name  of  El,  which  had  become  current 
within  a  powerful  circle,  and  which,  therefore,  was  an  accejjtable 
designation  of  a  national  god.  When  other  tutelar  gods  did  not 
succeed,  there  was  resort  to  Jahveh,  probably  in  the  early  in- 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


stances  because  he  was  the  most  celebrated  of  all  the  tutelar  gods, 
and  the  reason  for  that  celebrity  was  that  the  most  powerful  of 
the 'clans  claimed  him  as  tutelar. 

Hecastothoism  is  a  title  given  to  the  earliest  form  of  religion 
known,  which  belongs  specially  to  the  plane  of  savagery.  In  it 
every  object,  animate  or  inanimate,  which  is  remarkable  in  itself 
or  becomes  so  by  association,  is  a  quaai  god.  The  transition  be- 
tween savagery  and  barbarism,  as  well  as  between  the  religions 
of  hecastotheism  and  zootheism,  connected  with  them,  was  not 
sharply  marked,  so  that  all  their  features  could  coexist  at  a  later 
era,  though  in  differing  degrees  of  importance. 

This  intermixture  is  found  both  among  the  Israelites  and  In- 
dians. An  illustration  among  many  is  in  the  worship  of  localities 
and  of  local  gods.  Conspicuous  rocks,  specially  large  trees,  pecul- 
iar mountains,  cascades,  whirlpools,  and  similar  objects  received 
worship  from  the  Indians ;  also  the  places  where  remarkable  oc- 
currences, as  violent  storms,  had  been  noted ;  and  among  some 
tribes  the  particular  ground  on  which  the  fasting  of  individuals 
had  taken  place,  with  its  accompanying  dreams.  The  Indians 
frequently  marked  these  places,  often  by  a  pile  of  stones.  The 
Dakotas,  when  they  did  not  have  the  stones,  used  buffalo  skulls. 

In  the  Old  Testament  frequent  allusions  are  made  to  a  place 
becoming  holy  where  dreams  or  remarkable  events  had  occurred. 
They  were  designated  by  pillars.  The  Israelite  compilers  adopted 
the  pillar  of  Bethel  for  the  samt  reason  that  required  Mohammed 
to  adopt  the  Caaba.  Though  struggling  for  monotheism,  they 
could  not  always  directly  antagonize  the  old  hecastotheism. 

Future  State. — The  topic  of  a  future  state  may  be  divided  into 
(1)  the  simple  existence  of  the  soul  after  death,  (2)  the  resurrec- 
tion of  the  body,  and  (3)  a  system  of  rewards  and  punishments 
in  the  next  world. 

The  classical  writers  often  distinguished  two  souls  in  the  same 
person — one  that  wandered  on  the  borders  of  the  Styx  until  the 
proper  honors  had  been  given  to  the  corpse:  the  other  being  a 
shadow,  image,  or  simulacrum  of  the  first,  which  remained  in  its 
tomb  or  prowled  around  it.  The  latter  could  be  easily  invoked  by 
enchanters. 

Some  of  the  Indians  thought  that  the  souls  of  the  dead  passed 
to  the  country  of  their  ancestors,  from  which  they  did  not  dare  to 
return  because  there  was  too  much  suflFering  on  the  road  forward 
and  backward.  Nevertheless,  they  believed  that  there  was  some- 
thing spiritual  which  still  existed  with  their  human  remains,  and 
they  tell  stories  of  it.  Thus  there  are  two  souls,  and  the  Dakotas 
have  four,  one  of  which  wanders  about  the  earth  and  requires 
food,  the  second  watches  over  the  body,  the  third  hovers  around 
the  village,  and  a  fourth  goes  to  the  land  of  spirits. 


la 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN, 


»5 


The  Iroquois  and  Hurons  believed  in  a  country  for  the  souls  of 
the  dead,  which  they  called  the  "  country  of  ancest(jrs."  This  is 
to  the  west,  from  which  direction  their  traditions  told  that  they 
had  migrated.  Spirits  must  go  there  after  death  by  a  very  long 
and  painful  journey,  past  many  rivers,  and  at  the  end  of  a  narrow 
bridge  fight  with  a  dog  like  Cerberus,  and  some  may  fall  into 
the  water  and  be  carried  away  over  precipices.  This  road  is  all 
on  the  earth  ;  but  several  of  the  Indian  tribes  consider  the  Milky 
Way  to  be  the  path  of  souls,  those  of  human  beings  forming  the 
main  body  of  the  stars,  and  their  dogs,  which  also  have  souls,  run- 
ning on  the  sides.  In  their  next  world  the  Indians  do  the  same 
as  they  customarily  do  here,  but  without  life's  troubles. 

The  Israelites  believed  in  a  doubling  of  the  person  by  a  shadow, 
a  pale  figure,  which  after  death  descended  under  the  earth  and 
there  led  a  sad  and  gloomy  existence.  The  abode  of  these  poor 
beings  was  called  Sheol.  There  was  no  recompense,  no  punish- 
ment. The  greatest  comfort  was  to  be  among  ancestors  and  rest- 
ing with  them.  There  were  some  very  virtuous  men  whom  God 
carried  up  that  they  might  be  with  him.  Apart  from  these  elect, 
dead  men  went  into  torpor.  Man's  good  fortune  was  to  be  accord- 
ed a  long  term  of  years,  with  children  to  perpetuate  his  family 
and  respect  for  his  memory  after  death. 

'  The  Indians  did  not  believe  in  existence  after  death  in  a  posi- 
tive and  independent  state.  The  spirit  does  not  wholly  leave  the 
body  and  the  body  is  not  resurrected.  Perhaps  a  good  commen- 
tary upon  their  belief  is  furnished  by  a  tribe  of  Oregon  Indians 
who,  hearing  missionaries  preach  on  the  resurrection,  imme- 
diately repaired  to  an  old  battle-field  and  built  great  heaps  of 
stones  on  the  graves  of  their  fallen  foes  to  prevent  their  coming 
up  again.    They  did  not  want  any  of  that. 

Among  the  Israelites  the  resurrection  of  the  body  was  a  for- 
eign idea  imbibed  during  the  captivities  in  Assyria  and  Babylo- 
nia. Perhaps  the  first  reference  made  to  it  is  in  the  prophet  Dan- 
iel. It  was  not  fully  believed  in  so  late  as  the  procuratorship  of 
Pontius  Pilate. 

Among  the  Indians  privation  of  burial  and  funeral  ceremonies 
was  a  disgraceful  stigma  and  cruel  punishment.  There  was  trouble 
about  children  who  died  shortly  after  their  birth,  and  also  about 
those  whose  corpses  were  lost,  as  in  the  snow  or  in  the  waters.  In 
ordinary  cases  of  death  the  neglect  of  full  and  elaborate  ceremo- 
nies caused  misfortune  to  the  tribe. 

The  story  of  the  "  happy  hunting-ground  "  among  the  Indians 
has  not  been  generally  apprehended.  As  regards  what  we  now 
consider  to  be  moral  conduct  there  was  no  criterion.  A  good  In- 
dian was  one  who  was  useful  to  his  clan  and  family,  and  at  the 
time  of  his  death  was  not  under  charges  of  violating  the  clan  rules. 


i6 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


for  which  the  Polynesian  word  fahu  has  been  adopted.  The  moral 
idea  of  goodness  of  a  Pani  chief  is  to  be  a  successful  warrior  or 
hunter.  The  actual  condition  at  the  moment  of  death  decided  the 
condition  in  the  future  far  more  than  any  conduct  during  the  past. 
In  the  portions  of  the  continent  where  the  scalp  was  taken,  the 
scalped  man  remained  sculped  in  the  world  of  spirits,  though  some 
tribes  believed  that  scalping  ])revented  his  rea(?hing  that  world. 
If  he  had  but  one  leg  or  eye  here,  he  had  but  (me  leg  or  eye  after- 
ward. In  tribes  where  they  cut  off  the  ears  of  slain  foes  the 
spirit  remained  without  ears.  A  special  instance  is  where  the  vic- 
tim was  considered  too  brave  to  be  scalped,  but  the  conquerors  cut 
off  one  hand  and  one  foot  from  the  corpse  to  keep  him  from  in- 
flicting injury  upon  the  tribe  of  the  conquerors  in  the  next  world. 
Some  of  the  tribes  thought  that  if  an  Indian  died  in  the  night  he 
remained  in  total  darkness  ever  afterward. 

One  of  the  most  curious  of  their  beliefs  was  in  connection  with 
drowning  and  hanging,  the  conceit  being  that  the  spirit  (which 
was  in  the  breath)  did  not  escape  from  the  body.  This  doctrine 
was  made  of  special  application  to  prevent  suicide,  which  was 
generally  performed  either  by  hanging  or  drowning,  the  deduction 
being  that  suicides  could  not  go  to  the  home  of  the  ancestors. 

It  is  ])robable  that  the  various  trials  which  the  spirit  is  sup- 
posed to  undergo  before  reaching  the  other  world  were  devised 
to  secure  confidence  in  the  absence  thereafter  of  the  ghosts  of  the 
dead,  because  the  same  difliculty  would  attend  their  return.  As 
without  the  assistance  of  mortuary  rites  the  ghosts  would  not  be 
able  to  reach  their  final  home,  their  permanent  absence  was  se- 
cured because  there  were  no  repetitions  of  those  rites  to  assist  their 
return.  Fear  of  the  ghosts,  not  only  of  enemies  but  of  tlie  dearest 
friends,  generally  prevailed.  After  a  death  all  kinds  of  devices 
were  employed  to  scare  away  the  spirit.  Sometimes  a  new  exit, 
through  which  the  corpse  was  taken,  was  cut  through  the  wigwam 
and  afterward  filled  up,  it  being  supposed  that  the  spirit  could 
re-enter  only  by  the  passage  through  which  it  went  out.  Some- 
times the  whole  wigwam  was  burned  down.  There  was  often  a 
long  period,  which  travelers  called  that  of  mourning,  during 
which  drums  and  rattles  were  used  to  drive  away  the  spirits. 
After  firearms  were  obtained,  they  were  discharged  in  and  around 
the  late  home  of  the  deceased  with  the  same  object.  The  loud 
cries  of  so-called  lamentation  had  probably  a  similar  origin,  and 
this  is  more  marked  when  the  lamenters  were  strangers  to  the 
dead,  and  even  professionals,  not  unlike  the  Irish  keeners. 

In  this  general  connection  it  is  proper  to  allude  to  the  common 
abstinence  from  pronouncing  the  true  name  of  any  dead  person. 
This  is  more  distinct  than  the  sociologic  custom  where  the  man's 
true  name  should  not  be  used  in  his  life  except  on  special  occa- 

VOL.  XXXVI. —  6 


ISRAELITE  AND   INDIAN. 


»7 


sions.  There  was  some  fear  that,  })y  calling  his  name,  he  might 
come  back. 

It  would  be  wrong  to  accuse  the  Indians  of  want  of  feeling  in- 
dicated by  their  horror  of  the  dead.  In  ono  of  the  most  ancient 
accounts — that  of  Cabeza  de  Vaca — it  is  declared  that  the  parents 
and  other  relatives  of  the  sick  show  much  sympathy  while  life  re- 
mains, but  give  none  to  the  dead — do  not  speak  i»f  them  or  weep 
among  themselves,  or  make  any  signs  of  grief  or  approach  the  body. 
This  domestic  reticence  is  entirely  different  from,  but  not  antago- 
nistic to,  the  obligatory  mortuary  rites  which  were  practiced. 

To  secure  the  living  from  the  presence  of  the  spirits  of  the 
dead  was  the  first  object,  and  the  second  was  to  assist  those  spirits 
in  the  journey  to  their  destinaticjn.  These  were  the  prevailing 
ideas  of  all  the  mortuary  customs  of  the  Indians.  It  may  be  true 
that  there  was  in  some  cases  (though  missionary  influence  is  to  be 
suspected)  a  belief  that  there  were  two  different  regions  in  which 
the  bad  and  the  good  would  severally  remain,  but  that  was  not  of 
general  acce^jtanco.  There  was  but  one  future  country,  and  the  only 
question  was  whether  the  spirits  got  there  or  not.  There  was  no  hell. 

The  Israelites,  in  their  sacred  books,  do  not  show  the  influence 
of  fears  or  hopes  concerning  a  future  state  with  reference  to  indi- 
vidual morality.  Among  them  death  at  any  age  was  not  an  inevi- 
table necessity,  as  they  thought  that  life  might  be  prolonged  to  an 
indefinite  extent,  but  it  was  inflicted  as  a  punishment  and  their 
signs  of  mourning  were  acts  of  penitence  and  contrition,  with  the 
idea  that  the  survivors  might  have  been  the  cause  of  the  death. 
All  deaths  were  classed  with  public  calamities,  such  as  pestilence, 
famine,  drought,  or  invasion,  being  the  work  of  an  enemy~per- 
hajjs  a  punishing  god,  perhaps  a  daimon  or  a  witch.  They  re- 
garded it  so  great  an  evil  to  die  unlamented  that  it  was  one  of  the 
four  great  judgments  against  which  they  prayed,  and  it  was  called 
the  burial  of  an  ass.  These  are  tlie  inferences  to  be  derived  from 
the  books  as  we  have  them.  It  is,  however,  questionable  whether 
rites  attending  upon  death  were  not  with  them  similar  in  intent 
to  those  of  the  Indians— i.  e,,  to  provide,  by  means  of  those  rites, 
for  the  future  welfare  of  the  disparted,  rather  than  in  accordance 
with  our  modern  sentiment,  to  show  respect  and  personal  sorrow. 
Passages  of  the  Old  Testament  may  be  noted— e.  g.,  the  one  tell- 
ing how  the  bodies  of  Saul  and  his  children  were  rescued  from 
Bethshan  and  taken  to  Jabesh,  where  they  were  burned  and  the 
bones  buried.  The  ceremony  in  this  case  and  others  seems  to  have 
been  the  burning  of  the  flesh  and  the  burial  of  the  bones,  as  was 
frequently  done  by  the  Indians  on  occasions  of  haste,  without 
waiting  as  usual  for  the  decay  of  the  flesh,  the  later  gathering  of 
the  bones  being  at  stated  periods  of  years. 

There  is  no  evidence  that  the  Israelites  feared  the  corpse  and 


l8 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


its  surroundings  "beyond  that  to  be  inferred  from  the  ordinances 
concerning  pollution,  which,  however,  are  significant. 

Religious  Practices. — There  should  always  be  a  cross-refer- 
ence in  thought  between  what  in  time  became  a  religious  jjractice 
and  the  earlier  sociology,  to  be  mentioned  in  its  place,  with  which 
it  was  closely  connected. 

Josephus  remarks  about  the  Israelites  that  "  beginning  imme- 
diately from  the  earliest  infancy,  nothing  was  left  of  the  very 
smallest  consequence  to  be  done  at  the  pleasure  and  disposal  of 
the  person  himself." 

The  same  is  true  regarding  the  Indians.  Their  religious  life 
is  as  intense  and  all-i)ervading  as  that  of  the  Israelites.  It  is  yet 
noticed  in  full  effect  am(jng  tribes  as  widely  separated,  both  by 
space  and  language,  as  the  Zufii  and.  the  Ojibwa,  and  their  jjrac- 
tices  are  astonishingly  similar  in  essence  and  even  in  many  details 
to  some  of  those  still  prevailing  in  civilization. 

Among  the  Hurons  and  Iroquois  there  were  religious  rites  for 
all  occasions,  among  others  for  the  birth  of  a  child,  for  the  first 
cutting  of  its  hair,  for  its  naming,  and  for  its  puberty,  for  the  ad- 
mission of  a  young  man  into  the  order  of  warriors,  and  the  pro- 
motion from  warrior  to  chieftain,  for  making  a  mystery-man,  for 
first  using  a  new  canoe,  for  l)reaking  tillage-ground,  for  sowing 
and  harvest,  for  fixing  tln^  time  to  fish,  for  deciding  upon  a  war- 
like expedition,  for  marriages,  for  the  torturing  of  captives,  for 
the  cure  of  disease,  for  consulting  magicians,  invoking  the  daimons, 
and  lamenting  the  dead. 

Shamans. — Among  the  Indians  there  was  frequently  an  estab- 
lished and  recognized  priesthood,  provided  by  initiation  into  secret 
religious  societies,  corresponding  in  general  authority  to  that  of 
the  Levites,  although  the  order  of  the  latter  Avas  instituted  in  a 
different  manner,  perhaps  imitated  jTom  the  exclusive  class  of  the 
priesthood  in  Egypt.  The  shamans  in  all  tribes  derived  a  large 
part  of  their  support  from  fixed  contributions  or  fees. 

Adair  describes  a  special  ceremony  for  the  admission  or  conse- 
cration of  a  priest  among  the  southern  tribes,  as  follows :  "  At  the 
time  of  making  the  holy  fire  for  the  yearly  atonement  of  sin  the 
Sagan  clothes  himself  with  a  white  epliod,  which  is  a  waistcoat 
without  sleeves,  and  sits  down  on  a  white  buckskin,  on  a  white 
seat,  and  j)uts  on  it  some  white  beads,  and  wears  a  new  pair  of 
white  buckskin  moccasins,  made  by  himself,  and  never  wears  these 
moccasins  at  any  other  time." 

Similar  exclusive  use  by  the  high  priest  of  the  garments  used 
on  the  day  of  the  atonement  is  mentioned  in  Leviticus. 

In  addition  to  the  organized  class  referred  to,  there  were  other 
professional  dealers  in  the  supernatural  who  may  be  called  con- 
jurers, sorcerers,  or  prophets.   They  were  independent  of  and  often 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


19 


antagonistic  to  the  repjular  slianians.  Instance  tlio  Jossakeecl  of 
the  Ojil)wa,  rivals  of  the  Midt',  as  the  Israciite  prophets  were  of 
the  Levites.  At  the  time  of  the  Judges  the  i)rophets  were  isolated 
and  without  any  common  doctrine.  These  irregular  ])ractiti()iiers 
arrived  at  recognition  individually  hy  j)ersonal  skill  in  an  exhibi- 
tion of  supernatural  power — that  is,  they  wrought  miracles  to 
])rove  themselves  genuine. 

At  the  time  of  the  exodus  there  were,  among  all  the  Semitic 
tribes,  sorcerers  who  possessed  mysterious  secrets  and  enjoyed 
simie  of  the  power  of  the  eloliim.  Tiiey  were  i)ai(l  to  curse  those 
whose  ruin  was  desired.  Balaam  was  the  most  distinguished  sor- 
cerer of  that  time. 

One  of  the  most  freqnent  purposes  for  employing  supernatural 
agency  was  to  bring  on  rain  in  time  of  drought.  The  practi- 
tioner generally  tried  to  delay  his  incantations  as  long  as  possi- 
ble in  hopes  of  a  meteorologic  change.  Sometimes,  on  failure,  he 
was  killed,  as  he  was  supposed  to  he  an  enemy  who  possessed  the 
power  he  professed  but  was  unwilling  to  use  it;  and  to  prevent 
this  dangerous  ordeal  in  a  dry  season,  he  charged  in  advance  cer- 
tain crimes  and  "pollutions'"  against  the  people,  on  account  of 
which  all  his  skill  would  be  in  vain.  The  more  skillful  rain-makers 
am(jng  the  Sioux  and  the  Mandans  managed  not  to  be  among  the 
beginners,  but  toward  the  last  of  the  various  contestants.  The 
rain  would  surely  come  some  time,  and  when  it  came  the  incanta- 
tions ceased.  The  shaman  who  held  the  floor  at  the  right  time 
produced  the  rain. 

Freqiient  reference  to  rain-making  is  found  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, in  which  the  prophets  were  the  actors. 

The  mystery-men  were  consulted  on  all  occasions  as  sources  of 
truth,  not  only  to  explain  dreams,  but  to  disclose  secrets  of  all 
kinds;  to  predict  successes  in  war;  to  tell  the  causes  of  sickness; 
to  bring  luck  in  the  hunt  or  in  fishing ;  to  obtain  stolen  articles ; 
and  to  produce  ill  luck  and  disease.  Their  processes,  together 
with  thaumaturgic  exhibitions,  included  some  empiric  knowledge, 
and  also  tricks  of  sleight-of-hand  and  hypnotic  passes. 

The  Chahta  had  a  peculiar  mode  of  finding  the  cure  for  dis- 
ease, by  singing  successively  a  number  of  songs,  each  one  of  which 
had  reference  to  a  peculiar  her!)  or  mode  of  treatment.  The  pref- 
erence of  the  patient  for  any  song  indicated  the  remedy. 

The  Israelites  believed  that  diseases  as  well  as  accidents  with- 
out apparent  cause,  and  other  disasters,  were  the  immediate  acts 
of  the  elohim  or  were  caused  by  evil  spirits ;  therefore  they  relied 
upon  prophets,  magicians,  or  enchanters  for  exorcism.  Hezekiah's 
boil  was  cured  by  Isaiah.  Benhadad,  King  of  Syria,  and  Naaman, 
the  Syrian,  applied  to  the  prophet  Elisha.  All  the  people  resorted 
to  their  favorite  mystery-men. 


20 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


Even  so  late  as  the  time  of  J(»Hej)]m8  it  was  believed  that  Solo- 
mon hud  invented  incantations  by  which  diseases  were  cured,  and 
some  handed  down  by  tradition  were  commonly  used.  Incenae 
banifhod  the  devil,  which  also  ccmld  be  done  by  the  liver  of  a  fish. 
Certain  herbs  and  roots  had  the  same  power.  Their  medical  prac- 
tices nii^ht  be  recited,  with  slight  change  of  language,  as  those  of 
the  Indians.  The  further  back  examination  is  made  into  sav- 
agery and  bar])arism,  the  more  prevalent  faith-cure  aj)pears. 

Wifches. — The  Iniiians  were  in  constant  dread  of  witches,  wiz- 
ards, and  evil  sjiirits;  but  the  activity  of  the  good  spirits  was  not 
so  inanifest.  Tiiey,  however,  told  Adair  how  they  were  warned 
by  what  he  calls  angels,  of  an  ambuscade,  by  which  warning  they 
escaped.  Bad  si)irits,  or  devils,  were  the  tutelar  gods  of  enemies, 
to  be  resisted  by  a  friendly  tutelar.  The  idea  of  a  personal  Satan 
was  not  found  before  the  arrival  of  the  missionaries. 

Among  the  Indians  witches  were  often  indicated  by  the  dreams 
of  victims.  They  were  sometimes  killed  merely  upon  accusation, 
and  it  is  interesting  to  notice,  with  relation  to  comparatively 
modern  history,  that  the  accused  frequently  confessed  that  they 
were  sorcerers,  and  declared  that  they  could  and  did  transform 
themselves  into  animals,  become  invisible,  and  disseminate  dis- 
ease. 

A  sufficient  reference  to  the  Israelites  in  this  connection  is  to 
quote  the  ordinance,  "  Thou  slialt  not  suffer  a  witch  to  live."  This 
injunction,  in  the  higher  civilization,  is  observed  by  destroying 
the  idea  that  witches  live,  ever  have  lived,  or  ever  can  live. 

Dreams  and  Divinations. — The  topics  of  inspiration  by  dreams 
and  divination  by  oracles  may  be  grouped  together. 

The  Indians  supposed  that  with,  and  sometimes  without,  a  spe- 
cial fasting,  and  other  devices  to  produce  ecstasy,  the  spirits  or 
daimons  manifested  themselves  in  dreams.  It  was  sometimes  pos- 
sible in  these  dreams  for  the  soul  to  leave  the  body,  and  even  to 
visit  the  abode  of  departed  spirits. 

Among  the  Iroquoian  tribes  the  suggestions  made  by  dreams 
were  implicitly  followed,  not  only  by  the  dreamer,  but  by  those 
to  whom  he  communicated  his  dreams.  For  instance,  an  Iroquois 
dreamed  that  his  life  depended  upon  his  obtaining  the  wife  of  a 
friend,  and,  though  the  friend  and  his  wife  were  living  happily, 
and  parted  with  great  reluctance,  the  dreamer  had  liis  wish.  The 
same  tribe  had  a  special  feast  which  was  called  the  "  feast  of 
dreams,"  and  partook  of  the  nature  of  Saturnalia.  Every  object 
demanded  by  the  dreamers  must  be  given  to  them.  In  some  in- 
stances they  were  unable  to  remember  their  dreams,  and  the  spe- 
cial interposition  of  the  mystery-men  was  invoked  to  state  what 
their  dreams  were  in  fact  and  what  was  their  significance. 

Among  the  invaluable  reports  of  the  Jesuit  missionaries,  one 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


21 


in  1039  gives  tlie  geimral  stattmu'iit  tliat  the  ImliaiiH  ooiisulttul 
dreams  for  all  their  decisions,  genenilly  fasting  in  advance;  that, 
in  fact,  the  dream  was  the  master  (»f  their  lives;  it  was  the  g(j<l  of 
the  country,  and  dictated  their  (Uicisions  concerning  important 
matters — hunts,  fishing,  remedi(»s,  dances,  games,  and  songs. 

The  belief  in  revelations  through  dreams  was  universal,  and 
the  ])()wer  of  explaining  them  was  also  by  revelation.  Their  le- 
gends on  this  subject  recall  those  abcmt  Joseph  and  Daniel.  In 
addition,  Job  xxxiii,  15,  l(i,  may  be  (|Uoted  : 

"  In  a  dream,  in  a  vision  of  the  night,  when  deep  sleep  falleth 
upon  n)en,  in  slumberings  uptm  the  bed, 

"  Then  He  openeth  the  ears  of  men  and  sealeth  their  instruc- 
tion." 

And  in  Deuteronomy  a  prophet  is  equivalent  to  a  dreamer  of 
dreams. 

There  were  various  oracles  among  the  Indians.  Those  most 
interesting  j  mo  are  connected  with  pictograjjhy.  Among  many 
tribes,  especially  the  Mandan,  Hidatsa  and  Minnitari,  after  cer- 
tain fasts  and  exercises,  hieroglyphics  deciding  the  questions 
which  had  been  propounded  appeared  next  morning  on  rocks. 
They  were  deciphered  by  the  shaman  who  had  made  them. 

The  apparatus  by  which  Jahveh  was  consulted  was  the  urim 
and  thummim,  a  form  of  oracle  described  as  connected  with  the 
ark.  It  ceased  to  be  known  in  the  fifth  century  before  Christ,  and 
is  now  but  vaguely  understood.  From  the  desciption  and  tradi- 
tion it  could,  physically,  have  been  worked  by  a  custodian. 

Severe  fasts  wore  probably  the  most  common  religious  prac- 
tices of  the  Indians.  These  were  continued  until  they  saw  visions, 
sometimes  sought  for  personal  benefit  as  deciding  upon  their 
names  to  bo  adopted  from  the  advent  of  a  guardian  spirit,  and 
sometimes  for  tribal  advantage.  The  doctrine  of  all  of  them,  as 
Father  Lafiteau  quaintly  observes,  was  the  same  that  i)re vailed 
among  many  people  of  his  day,  to  lead  the  mind  from  gross  and 
carnal  obstructions  of  the  body.  The  real  effect  was  to  produce 
mental  disorder.  This  ecstasy  obtained  by  fasting  was  often  ac- 
celerated by  profuse  sweating  and  the  use  of  purgative  or  emetic 
drinks.  Violent  and  prolonged  exercise  by  dancing  in  a  circle 
until  the  actors  dropped  in  a  swoon  sometimes  concluded  the  cere- 
monies. 

The  Israelite  prophets  were  excited  to  inspiration  by  external 
means,  such  as  dances  and  orgiastic  proceedings  resembling  those 
of  the  dervishes  and  those  of  the  Indian  mystery-men.  ]\Iusic  was 
a  general  accompaniment  of  the  ecstasy.  When  they  were  about 
to  prophesy,  they  wrought  themselves  into  a  condition  of  frenzy. 
When  Elisha  sent  one  of  the  children  of  the  prophets  to  anoint 
Jehu,  it  was  said  of  him,  "  Wherefore  cometh  this  mad  fellow  ?  " 


it 


ISRAELITK  AND   INDIAN. 


Polliifion  and  I*iirifir<d ion .—Tln'  Hnh}M't  of  pollution  and  |)uri- 
ficiitiou  liiiH  biMMi  much  and  properly  iiisi.stcd  upon  as  ailordin^'  a 
strikiiiK'  pJirullcl  bt'twron  tin*  Israc^litos  and  tin*  Indians.  Tim  In- 
dians iniidc  special  huts  for  the  women,  at  certain  pei'iods,  wlion 
they  were  considei'ed  so  unclean  that  nothing  which  they  touched 
could  he  used.  A  Muskoki  woman,  after  delivcu-y  of  a  child,  was 
separatcMl  from  her  husband  for  three  moons  (ei^dity-four  days). 
This  may  be  compared  with  the  Levitical  law  by  which  tho  mother 
of  a  female  child  was  to  be  sepai'ated  eighty  days  and  of  a  male 
forty  days.  J)r.  Bouflinot  says  that  in  some  Indian  tribes  there  was 
similar  dislinclion  between  mahMind  fi'inale  children. 

Among  the  southei'U  Indians  wounded  persons  having  running- 
sores  were  confined  beyond  the  village,  and  kept  strictly  se])arate, 
as  by  the  Levitical  law.  An  Israelite  dying  in  any  lumse  or  tent 
polluted  all  who  were  in  it  and  all  the  furinture  in  it,  and  this 
pollution  continued  for  seven  days.  All  who  touched  a  corpse  or 
a  grave  were  impure  for  the  same  tinu>.  Similarly,  many  of  the 
Indians  burned  down  the  house  where  there  had  been  a  death. 

Many  writers  luive  asserted,  as  one  of  the  excellence's  r)f  the 
Isra(4itt}  customs,  that  the  "  purification  "  imposed  upon  those  who 
liad  been  engage(l  in  a  burial  was  a  sanitary  regulation,  a  measure 
rendered  expedient  in  a  hot  country.  As  no  great  proportion  of 
the  Israelites  generally  inhabitcid  a  country  liot  to  the  degree 
indicated,  and  as  none  of  them  had  any  conception  of  disease  or 
the  cause  of  death,  this  explanation  is  liardly  sufhcient.  Much 
later  the  compilers  might  have  gained  some  sanitary  knowledge 
liy  which  the  old  su})erstition  was  utilized.  Its  true  explanation 
is  from  supernatural,  not  from  natural,  concepts.  It  is  probably 
connected  with  a  point  mentioned  before — i.  e.,  the  avoidance  of 
corpses  from  the  fear  of  the  spirit  of  the  dead  and  of  the  bad  spirit 
which  had  caused  the  death,  and  tho  purificatory  ceremony  was 
for  tho  daimon,  not  for  the  disease.  The  neglect  of  sanitation  is 
well  illustrated  among  the  Navajo,  who  are  little  affected  by  civ- 
ilization. Upon  the  death  of  one  of  their  members  they  block 
up  the  shelter  containing  the  corpse,  and,  from  fear  of  the  spook 
or  of  the  agent  of  death,  or  of  both,  not  from  fear  of  the  corpse 
itself,  they  never  again  visit  it.  Other  tribes  simply  piled  stones  on 
the  corj)se,  which  jn'evented  its  disturbance  by  beasts,  but  did  not 
absorb  the  effluvium.  Still  others  exposed  the  dead  on  scaffolds. 
To  leave  corpses  to  ])utrefy  freely  is  certainly  not  a  sanitary  meas- 
ure, yet  it  was  a  practice  existing  together  with  the  mortuary 
rites  before  mentioned,  though  many  of  the  tribes  practiced  earth- 
burial,  and  a  few  used  cremation. 

On  a  broad  examination  of  the  topic  of  "  pollution,"  so  styled 
by  most  writers,  it  seems  to  be  best  explained  by  our  recent  under- 
standing of  tahii. 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


•3 


Sarrifirp. — Maiionroimajifinod  forcfssniHTiorto  liinisclf.wlioyftt 
could  bt)  iuvokt'd  imd  iii()V(!d  to  und  from  any  purpose.  The  diviiio 
world  was  produced  in  his  own  iinaj.';c,  and  lie  ticatt'd  its  ^'ods  as 
lio  liicod  to  1)0  truatod  by  his  inferiors.  Ho  boliuvod  that  tho  way 
to  piacato  tho  forces  surrounding^  him  was  to  win  tlunu  over  as  men 
aro  won  over, by  making' presents  to  them.  This  elearly  continued 
amon^  tho  Isi'aelites  until  the  (^i,i,'hth  century  n.  c,  but  it  is  to  Im 
re^iU'ded  as  a  staj^o  succeeding  a  former  condition  of  zocilatry  iiini 
tottMuism,  without  notic(3  of  wliicdi  its  details  can  not  be  understood. 

Most  people  sacrificed  to  their  divinities  jilants,  fruits,  and  herbs, 
and  aninuils  taken  from  their  Hocks.  Peoph?  who  had  no  domes- 
tic animals  otfere(l  thos(»  taken  in  the  hunt.  The  Indians  olVei'ed 
the  maize  from  their  fields  and  the  animals  of  the  chase,  and  threw 
into  tho  lire  or  wati^r  tobacco,  or  otln^r  herbs  which  they  used  in 
tho  place  of  tobacco.  Sonu'times  these  objiH'ts  wore  liun^  up  in 
the  air  above  their  huts.  Tho  northern  AlKon(|uins  tied  living 
dof^s  to  high  rods,  and  let  them  expire.  In  a  sinular  manner  other 
Indians  stuck  u})  a  deer,  especially  a  white  deer,  on  i)oles.  Tho 
l)lains  tribes  gave  tho  same  ehivation  to  the  head  or  skin  of  an 
albino  buffalo  on  mounds,  not  having  {)oles  convenient.  The  spot- 
less red  heifer  of  the  Israelites  may  be  comi)ared  with  the  spotless 
white  animals  of  the  chase. 

The  southern  Indians  always  threw  a  small  piece  of  the  fattest 
of  the  meat  into  the  fire  when  eating  or  before  they  began  to  eat. 
They  commonly  pulled  their  newly  killed  venison  several  times 
through  the  smoke  of  the  fire — perhaps  ns  a  sacrifice,  and  perhaps 
to  consume  the  life-spirit  of  the  animal.  Tliey  also  burned  a  large 
piece  and  sometimes  the  whole  carcass  of  the  first  buck  they 
killed,  either  in  the  winter  or  the  summer  hunt.  The  Muskoki 
hurn  a  piece  of  every  deer  they  kill. 

The  Israelites  offered  daily  sacrifice,  in  which  a  lamb  (except 
the  skin  and  entrails)  was  burned  to  ashes.  In  some  of  their  sac- 
rifices there  was  not  only  distinction  between  animals  that  were 
fit  and  unfit,  but  in  the  mnnner  of  treatment.  Sometimes  tho  vic- 
tim was  not  to  be  touched,  but  slumld  be  entirely  consumed  by 
fire.  In  otliers  the  blood  should  Ix;  sprinkled  around  the  altar 
and  the  fat  and  the  entrails  burned,  the  remainder  of  the  body  to 
be  eaten  by  the  priests.  But  it  was  a  crime  to  eat  fiesh  that  had 
been  offered  in  sacrifice  to  a  false  god— i.e.,  god  of  another  people. 

The  offering  of  the  first-fruits,  and  therefore  of  tho  first-born, 
to  the  divinity,  was  one  of  tho  oldest  ideas  of  tlie  Semites.  Moloch 
and  Jahveh  were  conceived  as  being  the  fire,  devouring  whate\er 
was  offered  to  it,  so  that  to  give  to  the  fire  was  to  give  to  the  god. 
In  time,  a  substitute  was  suggested  ;  the  first-born  was  re[)l{iced 
by  an  animal  or  a  sum  of  money.  This  was  called  the  "  money  of 
the  lives." 


1 


H 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


The  "  green-corn  dance,"  common  to  many  Indian  tribes,  is 
essentially  the  same  ceremony  of  thanksgiving,  or,  more  correctly, 
rejoicing  with  payment,  for  the  first-fruits  of  the  earth.  Adair 
says  that  at  tlie  festival  of  the  first-fruits  the  Southern  Indians 
drank  plentifully  of  the  cusseena  and  other  bittei  liquids,  to 
cleanse  their  bodies,  after  which  they  bathed  in  deep  water,  then 
went  sanctified  to  the  feast.  Their  annual  expiation  of  sin  was 
sometimes  at  the  beginning  of  the  first  new  moon  in  which  their 
corn  became  full-eared,  and  sometimes  at  the  recurrent  season 
of  harvest.  They  cleansed  their  "  temple "  and  every  house  in 
the  village  of  everything  supposed  to  pollute,  carrying  out  even 
the  ashes  from  the  hearths.  They  never  ate  nor  handled  any 
part  of  a  new  harvest  till  some  part  of  it  had  been  offered  up ; 
then  they  had  a  long  fast  "  till  the  rising  of  the  second  sun."  On 
the  third  day  of  the  fast  the  holy  fire  was  brought  out  from 
the  "temple,"  and  it  was  produced,  not  from  any  old  fire,  but 
by  the  rubbing  of  sticks.  It  was  then  distributed  to  the 
people. 

Lafiteau  says  that  the  first  animal  the  young  hunter  kills  he 
burns  with  fire  a&  a  sacrifice.  Another  festival  was  a  kind  of  hol- 
ocaust, where  nothing  of  the  victim  was  left,  but  it  was  all  con- 
sumed, even  to  the  bones,  which  were  burned.  There  were  also 
feasts  of  first-fruits. 

The  Dakotat"  allowed  no  particle  of  the  food  at  any  of  their 
religious  feasts  to  be  left  uneaten.  All  bones  were  collected  and 
thrown  into  the  water,  that  no  dog  might  get  them  or  woman  tram- 
ple over  them.  It  was  a  rule  among  many  of  the  tribes  that  no 
bones  of  the  beast  eaten  should  be  broken.  There  is  no  doubt  that 
this  w.'-s  connected  with  zoolatry,  and  was  intended  to  prevent 
anger  on  the  part  of  the  ancestral  or  typical  animal,  the  result 
of  which  would  be  the  disappearance  of  the  game.  There  were 
many  other  ceremonies  of  the  same  intent.  When  the  Mandans 
had  finished  eating,  they  often  presented  a  bowlful  of  the  food 
to  a  buffalo-head,  saying,  "  Eat  this,"  evidently  believing  that,  by 
using  the  head  well,  the  living  herds  of  buffalo  would  still  come 
and  supply  them  with  meat. 

It  is  probable  that  what  many  authors  have  called  the  "  day  of 
atonement "  or  "  expiation  "  was  really  a  general  wiping  out  of 
offenses — a  settlement  of  accounts  between  individuals  and  par- 
ticularly between  clans,  after  which  there  should  be  no  reprisal. 
This  is  illustrated  by  a  peculiar  ceremony  among  the  Iroquois, 
strongly  resembling  the  scapegoat  of  the  Israelites.  A  white  dog, 
before  being  burned  at  the  annual  feast,  was  loaded  with  the  con- 
fessions or  repentings  of  the  people,  represented  by  strings  of 
wampum.    The  statute  of  limitations  then  began  to  operate. 

In  the  Jahvistic  version,  the  passover,  an  old  festival  held  in  the 


1 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


«? 


spring,  was  historically  connected  with  the  departure  from  Egypt. 
The  ceremonies  are  too  well  known  to  require  narration,  but  will 
readily  be  compared  with  those  of  the  Indians. 

Incense. — The.  use  of  incense  among  Indians  was  the  same  as 
among  Israelites — i.  e.,  to  bring  and  to  please  the  spirit  addressed. 
A  genuine  instance  among  the  Iroquois  was  where  tobacco  was 
offered  as  late  as  1883,  and  in  archaic  formal  language  still  pre- 
served, translated  as  follows : 

Address  to  the  fire :  '*  Bless  thy  grandchildren,  protect  and 
strengthen  th.em.  By  this  tobacco  we  give  thee  a  sweet-t-melling 
sacrifice,  and  ask  thy  care  to  keep  us  from  sickness  and  famine." 

Address  to  the  thunder :  "  O  grandfather !  thou  large-voiced, 
enrich  and  bless  thy  grandchildren;  cause  it  to  rain,  so  that  the 
earth  may  produce  food  for  us.  We  give  this  tobacco,  as  thou 
hast  kept  us  from  all  manner  of  monsters." 

The  Dakotas  not  only  burned  tobacco  in  their  "  buffalo  medi- 
cine "  to  bring  the  herds,  but  often  fragrant  grass.  Other  tribes 
burned  the  leaves  of  the  white  cedar.  These  forms  of  incense 
were  sometimes  used  to  entice  the  inimical  spirits,  the  shaman 
being  supposed  to  be  able,  when  they  had  arrived  in  the  form  of 
a  bear  or  some  other  animal,  to  kill  them  with  his  rattle.  Some 
of  the  Indians  believed  that  incense  and  sacrifices  generally  were 
to  be  used  only  for  the  spirits  from  whom  they  feared  harm.  They 
said  it  was  not  necessary  to  trouble  themselves  about  the  good 
spirits,  who  were  all  right  anyhow. 

Fefiches.-— Among  many  of  the  tribes  of  Indians  there  is  a  tri- 
bal toteni  (and  often  several  clan  totems)  which,  in  later  times 
becoming  chiefly  symbolic  and  emblematic,  was  once  used  in  ob- 
jective form  for  the  most  important  religious  purposes.  Particu- 
larly, it  was  carried  on  extensive  warlike  expeditions.  Adair, 
who  calls  it  an  "ark,"  describes  it  as  made  of  pieces  of  wood, 
fastened  together  in  the  form  of  a  square,  to  be  carried  on  the 
back.  It  was  never  placed  on  the  ground,  nor  did  the  bearers  sit 
on  the  earth  even  when  they  halted.  In  many  other  tribes  it  was 
a  bag  of  skins  and  its  contents  varied,  but  generally  were  "  blessed  '* 
or  "sacred"  fragments  of  wood,  stone,  or  bone.  Among  the  Oma- 
ha it  was  a  large  shell,  covered  with  various  envelopes,  and  was 
never  wholly  exposed  to  sight,  for  that  would  occasi<jn  death  or 
blindness. 

A  custodian  was  appointed  every  four  years  by  the  old  men  of 
the  Blackfeet,  to  take  charge  of  the  sacred  pipe,  pipe-stem,  mat, 
and  other  implements,  which  he  alone  was  permitted  to  handle. 

The  ark  of  the  Israelites  was  probably  derived  from  the  Egyp- 
tians, who  had  a  real  ark  which  was  carried  on  the  shoulders  of 
the  priests  in  jirocessions.  When  the  exodus  began,  the  Egyptian 
ark  for  convenience  was  changed  into  a  chest  fitted  with  staves 


a6 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


for  bearers.  It  became  the  standard  of  their  warring  and  wan- 
dering lil'e. 

In  addition  to  what  has  been  called  the  ark  or  tribal  fetich,  the 
mystery-bag  that  each  Indian  had  is  to  be  compared  with  the  Is- 
raelite teraph,  whicli  was  a  family  or  tutelary  fetich  independent 
of  the  national  worship,  and  later  was  the  subject  of  frequent 
denunciation.  It  was  ])r()bably  made  of  carved  wood,  and  was 
often  carried  on  the  person,  but  was  generally  held  as  a  house- 
hold god  or  domestic  oracle.  The  teraphim  markedly  resembled 
the  Roman  penafcs. 

This  comparison  is  explanatory  of  the  statement  that  neither 
the  Israelites  nor  the  Indians  worshiped  idols.  Its  truth  depends 
upon  what  is  considered  to  be  an  idol.  If  the  definition  is  limited 
to  the  human  form  the  assertion  is  true,  because  their  religion 
was  not  anthropomorphic  ;  but  fetiches  were  certainly  the  objects 
of  worship,  the  recrudescent  forms  of  which,  apjjearing  even  in 
civilization,  have  been  amulets,  lucky-stones,  pieces  of  wood  and 
charms. 

Sabbath. — It  is  not  possible,  in  discussing  the  Israelites,  to  neg- 
lect the  institution  of  the  Sabbath.  The  four  quarters  of  the 
moon  made  an  obvious  division  of  the  month,  and  wherever  the 
new  moon  and  full  moon  are  made  religious  occasions  there  comes 
a  cycle  of  fourteen  or  fifteen  days,  of  which  the  week  of  seven  or 
eight  days  forms  half.  It  is  significant  that  in  the  older  parts  of 
the  Hebrew  Scriptures  the  new  moon  and  the  Sabbath  are  almost 
invariably  mentioned  together.  Among  the  Israelites,  and  per- 
haps among  the  Canaanites,  joy  on  the  new  moon  became  the  type 
of  religious  festivity  in  general.  There  is  an  indication  that  in 
old  times  the  feast  of  the  new  moon  lasted  two  days,  so  that  an 
approximation  to  regular  recurrence  of  the  subdivisions  constitut- 
ing the  week  was  gained.  The  Babylonians  and  Assyrians  had 
an  institution  dividing  the  month  into  four  parts,  by  which,  on 
the  days  assigned,  labor  was  forbidden ;  but  originally  the  Israel- 
ites' abstinence  from  labor  was  only  incidental  to  their  not  work- 
ing at  the  same  time  that  they  were  feasting.  While  they  were 
nomads,  with  only  intermittent  work,  they  had  no  occasion  for  a 
fixed  day  of  rest. 

The  new  moons  were  at  least  as  important  as  the  Sabbath  until 
the  seventh  century  before  Christ.  When  the  local  sacrifices  Avere 
abolished  and  the  r'\es  and  feasts  were  limited  to  the  central  altar, 
which  practically  could  be  visited  only  at  rare  intervals,  the  gen- 
eral festival  of  the  new  moon  ceased.  The  Sabbath  did  not,  biit 
became  an  institution  of  law  divorced  from  ritual.  The  connec- 
tion between  the  week  of  seven  days  and  the  work  of  creation  is 
now  recognized  as  secondary.  The  original  sketch  of  the  deca- 
logue probably  did  not  contain  any  allusion  to  the  creation,  and  it 


I 


r 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


27 


is  even  doubtful  whether  the  original  form  of  Genesis  distributed 
creation  over  six  days. 

Subsequent  history  of  the  Sabbath  shows  a  reflex  action  be- 
tween religion  and  sociology.  Religion  prevailed  against  better 
arrangements  for  periods  of  rest.  Sociology  used  religion  to  get 
what  it  could. 

The  Indians  reached  only  the  lirst  pail  oT  llie  inception  of  the 
Sabbath  in  the  ceremonies  of  the  new  and  I'lill  moon,  wliich  were 
to  them  of  great  importance,  those  of  ibe  new  moon  being  most 
noted. 

Circumcision. — This,  generally  regarded  as  a  distinctive  mark 
of  the  Israelites,  is  by  no  means  peculiar  to  them,  and  is  found  in 
so  many  parts  of  the  world,  with  such  evidences  of  great  antiquity, 
as  to  contravene  its  attribution  to  them.  Its  origin  is  a  subject 
of  much  dispute.  As  practiced  indiscriminately  in  infancy,  it 
is  perhaps  a  surgical  blunder.  It  is  certain  that  among  the  Is- 
raelites it  was  not  at  first  a  religious  rite.  The  operation  was  not 
then  performed  by  the  priesthood,  but  by  a  secular  person  of  skill, 
without  ceremonials.  Afterward  it  was  regarded  as  an  initiatory 
ceremony,  and  as  such  its  parallels  connected  with  the  sexual 
organization  may  be  found  all  over  the  world,  but  as  a  special 
national  distinction  the  declared  object  was  not  attained.  Besides 
the  Egyptians,  Arabs  and  Persians,  with  whom  the  coincidence 
might  be  expected,  many  tribes  of  Africa,  Central  and  South 
America,  Madagascar,  and  scores  of  islands  of  the  sea,  show  the 
same  mark,  and  it  has  even  been  found  in  several  of  the  North 
American  tribes.  The  sole  motive  for  alluding  to  this  very  c(mi- 
prehensive  subject  is  to  correct  the  popular  belief  that  the  custom 
is  peculiar  to  the  Israelites.  In  this  as  in  many  other  alleged  re- 
spects they  were  not  "  peculiar." 

n. 

Parallel  Myths. — The  early  religious  opinions  and  practices 
of  all  peoples  appear  in  myth  and  by  myths  are  explained.  When 
a  religion  has  endured  among  a  people  for  a  long  time  after  the 
use  of  writing  has  become  general,  its  myths  are  collected  and 
collated  and  formed  into  a  system.  This  system  generates  dogmas 
which  require  support  from  glosses  on  the  t^xt  of  the  (original 
myths ;  indeed,  these  texts  are  often  buried  under  a  nuiss  of 
homilies  and  predications,  or,  when  still  used  in  their  purity,  are 
interpreted  ad  libitum.  Such  is  the  history  of  the  myths  and  the 
religion  of  Israel. 

The  Indians  have  myths  and  legends  which  explain  their  re- 
ligious opinions  and  practices ;  but,  as  they  did  not  acquire  the  art 
of  writing,  they  did  not  formulate  articles  of  faith.  Their  beliefs 
must  be  ascertained,  therefore,  by  the  collection  and  study  of  the 
myths  themselves  as  now  reduced  to  writing  and  translated.    The 


28 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN, 


comparison  of  the  myths  of  the  Indians  with  the  myths  of  the 
Israelites  displays  striking  similarity  and  exhibits  more  clearly 
than  a  mere  statement  of  doctrines  the  likeness  of  the  religions  of 
the  two  peoples.  The  likeness  of  the  two  collections  of  myths  to 
one  another,  and  their  comparison  with  similar  collections  from 
other  peoples,  indicates  that  when  the  same  events  are  represent- 
ed as  occurring  everywhere,  they  really  occurred  nowhere,  but 
were  the  mental  conceptions  of  men  in  the  same  stage  of  intel- 
lectual culture. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  mention  deluge  legends  common  in  all 
countries  where  inundations  have  occurred,  and  only  a  general 
interest  attaches  to  the  mythical  culture  hero.  He  was  some- 
times an  inspired  man,  and  sometimes  a  benevolent  god  in  shape 
of  man,  but  in  his  more  archaic  forms  he  was  a  beast  with  human 
metamorphoses.  He  taught  all  that  is  known  of  hunting,  fishing, 
the  i)roperties  of  plants,  picture-writing,  and  indeed  of  every  art, 
and  founded  institutions  and  established  religions.  After  his 
achievements  he  generally  disappeared  with  mystery,  his  actual 
death  being  seldom  established,  leaving  a  hope  of  his  return  as  a 
triumphant  benefactor.  The  legends  relating  to  Michabo,  los- 
keha,  Hiawatha,  and  Manabosho  will  occur  to  all  special  students 
as  showing  their  analogues  in  the  biography  of  Moses.  But  the 
point  of  peculiar  interest  is  that  the  myths  referred  to  are  not 
only  similar  generically,  but  that  they  are  strikingly  identical  in 
their  minute  details  with  those  of  the  Israelites.  A  few  of  them 
will  be  noticed. 

It  will  be  understood  that  in  all  instances  presented  scrupulous 
care  has  been  taken  to  eliminate  European  influence  and  to  obtain 
assurance  of  the  aboriginal  and  ancient  origin  of  the  legends. 

An  Ojibwa  tradition  tells  the  adventures  of  eight,  ten,  and 
sometimes  twelve  brothers,  the  youngest  of  whom  is  the  wisest 
and  the  most  beloved  of  their  father  and  especially  favored  by  the 
high  powers.  He  delivers  his  brothers  from  many  difficulties  which 
were  brought  about  by  their  folly  and  disobedience.  Particularly, 
he  supplies  them  with  corn.  A  variant  statue  of  Lot's  wife  who, 
after  escaping  from  the  destruction  of  her  village,  was  turned  into 
stone  instead  of  salt,  is  still  shown  near  the  Mississippi  River. 
The  Chahta  have  an  elaborate  story  of  their  migrations  in  which 
they  were  guided  by  a  pole  leaning  in  the  direction  which  they 
should  take,  and  remaining  vertical  at  each  place  where  they 
shoiild  encamp.  A  still  closer  resemblance  to  the  guidance  of  the 
Israelites  in  the  desert  by  a  pillar  of  fire  is  found  in  the  legendary 
migrations  of  the  Tusayan,  when  indication  was  made  by  the 
movement  and  the  halting  of  a  star.  The  Pai  Utes  were  sustained 
in  a  great  march  through  the  desert  by  water  which  continually 
filled  the  magic  cup  given  to  the  Sokus  Waiunats  in  a  dream. 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


39 


until  ail  were  satisfied ;  and  a  similarly  miraculous  supply  of  food 
to  the  starving  multitude  is  reported  by  the  same  people.  In  the 
genesis  myth  of  the  Tusayan,  the  culture-hero  was  enabled  to  pass 
dry  shod  through  lakes  and  rivers  by  throwing  a  staff  upon  the 
waters,  which  were  at  once  divided  as  by  walls. 

Among  the  Ojibwa,  traditions  there  is  a  variant  of  the  concep- 
tion that  man  could  not  look  upon  the  form  of  a  divine  being  and 
live.  According  to  these  traditions  the  divine  beings  were  obliged 
to  wear  veils,  and  when  one  of  them  unintentionally  let  his  eyes 
fall  upon  the  form  of  a  man  the  man  fell  dead  as  if  struck  by 
lightning. 

The  Middwiwin  rite  was  granted  to  the  Ojibwa  at  a  time  of 
great  trouble,  through  the  intercession  of  Minabozho,  their  uni- 
versal uncle,  and  at  the  same  time  rules  of  life  were  given  to  them, 
which  are  still  represented  in  hieroglyphics  on  birch-bark.  They 
have  a  resemblance  in  motive  to  the  Biblical  legends  and  laws. 
At  the  time  of  a  great  pestilence,  which  came  "  when  the  earth 
was  new,"  the  Ojibwa  were  saved  by  one  of  their  number  to  whom 
a  spirit,  in  the  shape  of  a  serpent,  revealed  a  root  which  to  this 
day  they  name  the  "  snake-root,"  and  songs  and  rites  pertaining 
to  the  serpent  are  incorporated  in  the  Midewiwin. 

Mr.  W.  W.  Warren,  in  his  "  History  of  the  Ojibwa  Nation," 
tells  that  he  sometimes  translated  parts  of  Bible  history  to  the 
old  Ojibwa  men,  and  their  expression  invariably  was,  "  The  book 
must  be  true,  for  our  ancestors  have  told  us  similar  stories  genera- 
tion after  generation  since  tlie  earth  was  new."  Only  last  year  a 
well-informed  representative  in  Washington  of  the  Muskoki  an- 
swered questions  about  the  myths  and  legends  of  his  people  by 
the  simple  remark :  "  They  are  all  in  the  Old  Testament.  Read 
them  there,  without  the  trouble  of  taking  them  down  from  our 
people." 

Sociology. — The  golden  age  of  the  Israelites,  as  recorded  in 
the  Old  Testament  according  to  modified  tradition,  was  the  age 
ending  with  the  Judges.  The  people  lived  in  a  state  nearest  to 
their  ideal  under  a  supposed  theocracy,  which  really  was  not  in- 
stituted until  the  days  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.  Tlie  exi)loits  of 
Gideon,  Joplitliah,  and  Samson  are  pictures  of  antiquity  equal  in 
grandeur  and  like  in  import  to  those  of  the  Homeric  heroes.  If 
the  Indians  could  have  written  about  their  own  past,  they  would 
have  portrayed  a  similar  golden  age,  which,  indeed,  is  mirrored  in 
their  traditions  and  myths. 

But  it  must  always  l)e  borne  in  mind  tliat  the  Indians  were  not 
nomads,  and  were  never  in  the  true  pastoral  stage ;  hence  their 
tales  of  the  good  old  times  were  more  archaic  than  those  presented 
to  us  in  the  Israelite  records. 

Nomadic  life  requires  the  possession  of  either  domesticated 


30 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


animals  for  sustenance  or  of  hnrden-bearing  animals  by  whose 
aid  fresh  game  areas  may  be  readily  occupied.  The  ])ersistent 
nomads — e.  g.,  the  Arabs — have  i)ossessed  both  kinds  of  animals. 
Tiie  Indians  had  neitlier.  The  large  majority  of  the  historic  In- 
dians never  saw  a  horse  until  centuries  after  the  Columbian  dis- 
covery. The  Dakota,  Comanche,  and  some  other  tribes  became 
nomads  adventitiously,  and  only  after  the  introduction  of  the 
horse  by  Europeans.  The  means  of  subsistence  of  these  tribes  in 
a  nomadic  life  were  afterward  increased  by  their  obtaining  fire- 
arms. 

The  pastoral  stage  also  depended  upon  the  possession  of  some 
of  the  animals  mentioned.  It  expedited  the  transition  of  the  Is- 
raelites from  savagery  to  barbarism,  but  it  was  not  exx)erienced  by 
the  Indians.  Therefore,  supposing  that  the  two  peoples  were  at 
one  time  equally  advanced  in  culture,  it  might  well  have  required 
three  thousand  years  longer  for  the  Indians  to  reach  the  stage  in 
which  they  were  discovered  than  for  the  Israelites  to  attain  to  the 
culture  shown  in  the  days  of  the  Judges. 

At  the  time  taken  for  proper  comparison  between  the  two 
peoples,  which  has  before  been  designated,  both  were  living  under 
the  clan  or  totemic  system,  Avliich  was  formerly  called  the  gentile 
system. 

A  clan  is  a  body  of  kindred  in  which  kinship  is  established  by 
laws  now  long  disused,  and  so  strange  to  our  present  ideas  as  to  be 
comprehended  with  difficulty.  Some  of  the  more  salient  features 
of  the  system  appear  in  the  division  of  the  people  into  tribes 
which  are  interpermeated  by  clans,  with  special  rules  of  govern- 
ment, adoption,  punishment,  protection,  property,  and  marriage. 

The  totemic  stage  was  first  intelligently  noticed  among  the 
aborigines  of  America  and  Australia,  and  typical  representations 
of  it  are  still  found  among  them.  In  Australia  it  is  called  ko- 
bong.  An  animal  or  a  plant,  or  sometimes  a  heavenly  body,  is 
connected  witli  all  persons  of  a  certain  stock,  who  believe  that  it 
is  their  totem,  their  protecting  dainion.  They  regard  themselves 
as  descendants  of  the  totem,  and  they  bear  its  name.  The  line 
•of  descent  is  normally  female.  When  a  clan  becomes  dominant, 
its  totem  dairaon  prevails  together  with  it,  and  commands  the 
worsliip  of  all  the  clans  or  tribes  in  the  group,  the  daimons  of 
other  v'V'-'--  "nd  tri))es  becoming  subordinate. 

'■'li  c  s,  'st3m,  lately  found  in  actual  force  in  two  large  geo- 
r  ,;  •-  .c  a.  V  I.  lon>  of  the  world,  has  preserved  a  clew  to  the  moldered 
1.. :  .(^  v.f  m:in',i  early  institutions.  What  is  now  known  of  the 
Claris,  trl*^":...  rd  league  of  the  Iroquois  explains  what  was  for- 
merly mystical  about  the  tribes  (^f  Israel. 

Each  clan  or  tribe  took  as  a  badge  or  objective  totem  the 
representation  of  the  totemic  dairaon  from  which  it  was  named. 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


31 


It  was  generally  an  animal — 0.  g.,  an  eagle,  a  panther,  a  bniTalo, 
a  bear,  a  deer,  a  raccoon,  a  tortoise,  a  snake,  or  a  fisli,  hut  some- 
times one  of  the  winds,  a  celestial  body,  or  other  impressive 
object  or  phenomenon. 

The  Israelites  had  such  badges  or  totems  -which  have  been 
called  standards.  The  blessings  of  Jacob  and  of  Moses,  which 
mention  several  of  them,  were  not  merely  metaphoric.  In  the 
blessing  of  Jacob,  Judah  is  named  as  a  lion,  Issachar  as  aji  ass,  Dan 
as  a  serpent,  Naphtali  as  a  hind,  Benjamin  as  a  wolf,  Joseph  as  a 
bough.  In  that  of  Moses,  four  such  names  occur — Epliraim  as  a 
bullock,  Manasseh  as  a  bison.  Gad  as  a  lion,  and  Dan  as  a  lion's 
whelj).  From  all  the  evidence  on  the  subject  there  is  reason  to 
believe  that  these  were  the  leading  totems  in  the  tribes  mentioned, 
and  the  discrepancies  in  the  lists  may  be  accounted  for  by  the 
fact  that  the  head  clans  in  some  tribes  had  changed  in  the  in- 
terval. 

David  seems  to  have  belonged  to  the  serpent  stock.  The  most 
prominent  among  his  ancestors  bore  a  serpent  name.  Some  pas- 
sages in  his  life  show  his  connection  with  a  serpent  totem. 

Critics  have  doubted  whether  Moses  was  as  much  oi)posed  to 
idolatry  as  is  asserted  in  the  records,  for  a  brazen  serjjent,  i»erhaps 
an  ancient  idol  of  Jahveh,  said  to  have  been  set  up  by  him,  was 
in  existence  until  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  who  broke  it  into  pieces. 
Ti'ue,  it  may  have  been  an  idol  of  Jahveh,  or  perhaps  it  was  wor- 
shiped as  a  tenipli ;  but  it  nuxy  have  been  simply  a  totem.  Tlie 
lifting  up  of  the  brazen  serpent  by  Moses  in  the  wilderness  may 
be  more  consistently  explained  by  totemism  than  by  idolatry  in 
its  usual  sense. 

Ooverninent. — The  Israelites  in  their  normal  condition  were 
governed  by  a  number  of  their  elders  who  were  presumed  to 
have  the  greatest  wisdom  and  experience.  S[)ecial  powers  were 
conferred  in  emergencies  upon  one  man  and  were  intended  to  be 
of  short  duration,  but  while  they  lasted  they  were  dictatorial. 
The  judges  were  despots  Avithout  a  standing  army  or  an  organ- 
ized government.  Their  selection  was  due  neither  to  inheri- 
tance, to  suffrage,  nor  to  violence,  but  to  ])ersonal  superiority  in 
strength,  wisdom,  and  courage.  The  usujil  result  Avas,  that  the 
power  gained  by  a  ruler  was  held  during  his  life,  and  it  was  some- 
times contended  for  by  one  of  his  sons  with  temjiorary  success. 
The  government  of  the  Indians  was  substantially  the  same. 

The  alliance  of  the  tribes  was  loose.  They  seldom  hesitated  to 
make  war  upon  one  another.  Even  after  nationality  had  been 
initiated,  the  genius  of  David  and  the  magnificence  of  Solomon 
could  not  permanently  weld  them  together  ;  and  doubtless  without 
the  later  and  cohesive  establishment  of  Jahvism  they  would  have 
often,  though  perhaps  but  temporarily,  fallen  back  into  an  incoher- 


3» 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


ent  state.  Tho  Indians  did  not  gain  snch  a  conservative  bond, 
and  the  alliances  of  their  tribes  were  more  loose  and  transient. 

The  characteristics  of  the  Israelite  and  of  tlie  Indian,  as  of  the 
Homeric;  Acha'uns  and  of  the  extant  Bedouins,  were  predatory. 
The  tribe  and  its  clans,  with  their  occasional  allies,  went  fortli 
against  the  rest  of  the  world. 

In  tho  investigatioii  of  totemism  ar  jng  the  Israelites  it  is  im- 
portant to  observe  its  continued  existence  in  Arabia,  beca.ise  i\ve 
state  of  society  there  still  remains  more  primitive  than  that  preva- 
lent in  the  land  of  Israel  even  at  the  time  of  imposing  antiquity 
when  the  Old  Testament  was  written. 

A  large  number  of  tribes  having  animal  names  are  still  found 
among  the  Arabs.  Some  of  these  tribal  names  are  Lion,  Wolf, 
Ibex,  She-fox,  Dog,  Bull,  Ass,  Hyena,  and  Lizard.  The  origin  of 
all  these  names  is  referred  by  the  ])e()ple  to  an  ancestor  who  bore 
the  tribal  or  gentile  name.  The  animal  names  given  in  the  tribal 
genealogies  are  also  often  found  belonging  to  sub-tribes,  the  same 
animal  name  sometimes  occurring  in  subdivisions  of  different 
tribes.    These  particulars  correspond  with  the  Indian  clan  system. 

The  tribes  of  the  southern  and  eastern  parts  of  Canaan  had 
affinities  both  to  Israel  and  to  the  Aral)S.  The  Arab  i)rinces  of 
Midian  were  The  Raven  and  The  Wolf — heads  of  tribes  of  the 
same  names.  More  than  one  third  of  the  Horites,  the  descendants 
of  Seir  the  He-goat,  bear  animal  names ;  so  do  the  clans  of  the 
Edomites.  The  real  name  of  Moses's  father-in-law  is  in  dispute, 
but  he  had  some  connection  with  the  Kenites.  The  list  in  Gene- 
sis XXX vi  is  a  count  of  tribal  or  local  divisions  and  not  a  literal 
genealogy.  It  is  full  of  animal  names.  The  Antelope  stock  was 
divided  over  the  nation  in  a  way  only  to  be  explained  on  the  to- 
temio  and  not  on  a  genealogic  system.  The  same  names  of  totem 
tribes  that  appear  in  Arabia,  rejich  through  Edom,  Midian,  and 
Moab  into  Canaan,  where  they  slu^w  local  distribution,  which  is 
intelligible  only  on  the  assumption  that  the  totemic  system  pre- 
vailed there  also  when  the  first  books  of  the  Old  Testament  were 
written. 

Prof.  Robertson  Smith  gives  a  select  list  of  about  thirty  per- 
sons and  towns  in  point,  bearing  names  derived  from  animals  and 
plants.  Dr.  Joseph  Jacobs  has  expanded  that  list  into  a  humlred 
and  sixty  such  names,  thoiigh  he  considers  their  importance  to  be 
lessened  by  the  frequency  of  such  names  in  England,  forgetting, 
apparently,  that  the  clan  system  also  existed  among  the  ancestors 
of  the  English  people. 

The  twenty-sixth  chapter  of  Numbers  gives  the  clans  of  the 
Israelite  tribes.  Altogether  seventy-two  clans  are  mentioned,  and 
of  these  at  least  ten  occur  in  two  tribes,  among  which  the  Arodites 
or  Wild  Ass  clan,  found  both  in  Gad  and  in  Benjamin,  should  be 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


5S 


noted.  Other  clans  also  liave  animal  names:  the  Shilliinites  or 
Fox  clan,  of  Naphtali ;  the  Shuhamites  or  Serpent  clan,  of  Benja- 
min ;  the  Bachrites  or  Camel  clan,  of  Ephraim  and  Benjamin  ;  the 
Elonites  or  Oak  clan,  of  Zebuhm  ;  the  Tolaites  or  Worm  clan,  of 
Issachar  ;  and  the  Arelets  or  Lion  clan,  of  Gad. 

A  special  snggestion  comes  from  the  tribe  of  Simeon.  In  the 
blessing  of  Jacob,  Simeon  is  coupled  with  Levi  as  a  tribe  scat- 
tered in  Israel.  Some  Simeonites  lived  in  the  south  of  the  terri- 
tory of  Judah,  but  they  do  not  appear  there  as  an  independent 
local  tribe.  It  would  seem  that  Simeon  remained  as  a  divided 
stock,  having  representatives  through  the  female  line  in  the  dif- 
ferent local  groups.  When  the  old  system  was  transformed, 
Simeon  lost  importance  and  ultimately  dropped  from  the  list  of 
tribes.  The  name  of  the  tribe  was  lost  but  not  the  people,  as 
has  been  noticed  also  in  careful  statistical  examination  of  the 
Indians. 

The  tribe  of  Judah  received  the  powerful  accession  of  the  Dog 
tribe,  the  Calebites  (to  be  again  mentioned),  among  whom  there 
were  many  animal  names. 

In  view  of  the  above,  and  the  additional  fact  that  the  early 
Israelites  freely  intermarried  Avith  the  surrounding  nations,  it 
becomes  highly  probable  that  the  totemic  system  of  those  neigh- 
bors existed  in  all  Israel,  as  was  obviously  the  case  in  Judah. 

Punishment. — In  the  stage  of  barbarism  man  belongs  not  to 
himself,  but  to  his  clan  and  tribe.  In  civilization  crime  is  the  act 
of  an  individual  for  which  he  is  responsible  to  the  whole  commu- 
nity, and  there  can  be  no  crime  without  a  malicious  intent.  In 
the  totemic  stage  the  clan  was  responsible  to  all  its  members  and 
to  all  other  clans  for  the  offense  of  any  of  its  omhi  members,  and 
the  act  itself,  not  its  intent,  constituted  the  offense.  Hence  the 
rules  respecting  obedience,  punishment,  and  protection  differ  from 
those  of  civilized  man. 

Punishments  among  the  Indians  were  chiefly  death  or  expul- 
sion from  the  tribe — the  latter,  from  the  unprotected  state  of  the 
offender,  being  tantamount  to  death.  The  code  consisted  in  the 
application  of  the  lex  tdlionis.  The  vengeance  of  blood  for  homi- 
cide was  exacted  as  a  clan  duty.  It  was  executed  by  tlie  clan  of 
the  person  killed,  generally  by  the  nearest  of  clan  kinship,  and  it 
was  required  even  if  the  death  were  by  accident,  unless  the  kill- 
ing was  condoned  by  payment.  Among  the  Israelites  the  lex  ta- 
lionis  was  likewise  the  fundamental  law,  and  the  duty  of  blood 
revenge  also  devolved  on  the  kin  by  the  mother's  side — i.  e.,  the 
kindred  according  to  the  normal  clan  system. 

Sanchiary. — The  doctrine  that  no  crime  could  be  individual, 
but  might  be  committed  against  a  clan  by  a  clan  through  one  of 
its  members,  rendered  it  necessary  to  have  some  special  provision 


34 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


to  restrict  ven^^foanco  and  niaintaiu  peace.  Hence  the  right  of 
sanctuary,  whicli  appcarcMl  hiter  as  a  prerogative  of  religion,  was 
in  its  origin  sociologic. 

The  avenger  of  blood  among  the  Indians  generally  had  the 
right  to  slay  the  criminal  if  found  within  a  specihcd  time,  for  in- 
stance, two  days  after  the  act ;  but  if  he  sliould  escajie  beyond  such 
period,  the  avenger  could  no  longer  jjursue,  and  was  himself  liable 
if  he  shcjuld  persevere.  The  clan  or  clans  concerned  interfered  at 
that  stage  in  prescribed  modes.  Among  some  tribes  localities 
(called  by  Adair  the  "  cities  of  refuge  ")  were  designated,  in  which 
the  accused  could  remain  in  safety  until  the  g(>neral  settlement 
of  accounts  at  the  next  annual  festival.  Compare  Numl)ers  xxxv, 
12  :  "  And  they  shall  ])e  with  you  cities  of  refuge  from  the  avenger ; 
that  the  man-slayer  die  not,  until  he  stand  before  the  congrega- 
tion in  judgment." 

The  functions  of  the  avenger  of  blood  are  only  referred  to  in 
the  Pentateuch,  but  were  well  known  in  ordinary  cases.  The  law 
treats  of  the  exceptional  circumstances  of  an  accidental  homicide. 
There  is  a  trace,  in  Deuteronomy  xxiii,  of  the  general  coim  amal 
sanctuary  in  Israel.  It  enacts  that  any  town  or  village  shall  be 
an  asylum  for  an  escaped  slave.  In  Exodus  xxi,  the  altar  (pre- 
sumably any  one  of  the  numerous  village  altars)  is  mentioned  as 
a  refuge.  In  the  cities  of  refuge  the  san(;tuary  was  used  only  for 
the  mitigation  of  the  revenge  of  blood. 

A  mode  of  bringing  to  notice  the  barbarian  stage  of  the  Israel- 
ites at  the  time  under  consideration  is  to  translate  into  English 
familiar  personal  names  from  the  Old  Testament,  such  as  the 
Dog,  the  Dove,  the  Hyena,  the  Licm's  Whelp,  the  Strong  Ass,  the 
Adder,  and  the  Running  Hind.  This  brings  into  immediate  con- 
nection the  English  translation  of  Indian  names,  such  as  Big 
Bear,  White  Buffalo,  Wolf,  Red  Cloud,  Black  Hawk,  Fox,  Crow, 
and  Turtle.  Such  Israelite  names  were  probably  of  Gentile 
origin,  that  is,  from  the  clan  or  gens,  for  the  Israelites  were  surely 
Gentiles  in  the  true  ^ense,  although  later  they  abjured  the  charge. 
But  individuals  among  them  may  also  have  adopted  such  names 
because  they  could  be  represented  objectively.  Such  selection  is 
made  by  some  Indians  apart  from  their  totemic  designation.  In- 
dians possess  very  few  names  that  can  not  be  represented  in  ])icto- 
graphs ;  and  the  very  large  topic  of  tattooing  is  connected  with 
this  device  antecedent  to  writing.  The  compilers  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament probably  desired  to  break  down  a  former  practice,  as  is 
shown  in  Leviticus  xix,  28 :  "  Ye  shall  not  print  any  marks  upon 
you."    And  there  are  other  similar  indications. 

Adoption. — The  early  history  after  the  exodus  shows  many 
cases  of  adoption  from  among  the  neighboring  tribes  in  which 
the  captive  or  the  stranger  adopted  became  a  member  of  one  of 


ISRAELITE  AND   INDIAN. 


35 


tlio  clajis.  This  was  an  essential  part  of  tho  totoniic  system  as  is 
ii()tic(!(l  univ(M'sally  among  the  Indians.  Witliout  membershij)  in 
a  ohm  there  could  be  no  status  in  the  tribe. 

Caleb  is  first  known  as  tho  son  of  J(>i)lnmneh,  the  Kenezite. 
Next  he  appears  as  a  chief  of  the  tribe  of  Judah;  finally,  in  the 
book  of  Chronicles,  his  foreign  descent  is  lost.  He  becomes  Caleb, 
the  son  of  Hezron,  the  son  of  ^^udah.  This  is  an  instance  of  adop- 
tion and  is  not  contradictory.  Ho  is  first  described  in  accordance 
with  his  actual  descent,  but  when  a(h)pted  with  his  family  and 
followers,  who  probably  formed  a  snb-clan,  he  would  be  called  by 
the  name  of  the  family  that  adopted  him. 

The  whole  population  of  the  country  which,  according  to  Deu- 
teronomy, was  doomed  to  be  exterminated,  slowly  became  amal- 
gamated with  the  invaders.  In  this  way  alone  their  rapid  increase 
can  be  accounted  for. 

The  doctrine  that  no  quarter  should  be  shown  to  the  enemy 
and  no  alliance  should  be  made  with  the  Goim  (a  word  meaning 
the  "  nations,"  with  the  implication  of  "  heathen  ")  was  not  estab- 
lished until  the  late  prophetic  influence.  The  use  of  the  word 
Goim  dates  from  the  ninth  century  B.  C.  It  is  gratifying  to  be 
convinced  that  the  stories  of  tho  wholesale  extermination  and 
cruel  outrages  injected  into  the  historical  narrative  were  after- 
thoughts intended  to  be  examples  for  the  future,  and  that  they 
never  actually  occurred.  If  tho  stories  are  true,  tho  brutality  of 
the  Israelites  to  the  conquered  was  more  horrible  than  that  of  the 
Indians,  among  whom  captivity  was  tempered  by  adoption. 

An  interesting  custom  of  the  Indians  connected  both  Avith  the 
rite  of  sanctuary  and  that  of  adoption  is  that  called  by  English 
writers  "  running  the  gantlet."  When  captives  had  successfully 
run  through  a  line  of  tormentors  to  a  post  near  the  council-house, 
they  were  for  the  time  free  from  further  molestation.  In  the 
northeastern  tribes  this  was  in  the  nature  of  an  ordeal  to  test 
whether  or  not  the  captive  was  vigorous  and  brave  enough  to  be 
adopted  into  the  tribe ;  but  among  other  tribes  it  appears  in  a 
different  shape.  Any  enemy,  whether  a  captive  or  not,  could 
secure  immunity  from  present  danger  if  he  could  reach  a  central 
post,  or,  if  there  were  no  post,  the  hut  of  tho  chief.  A  similar 
custom  existed  among  the  Arikara,  who  kept  a  special  i)ipo  in  a 
"  bird-box."  If  a  criminal  or  enemy  succeeded  in  smoking  the 
pipe  contained  in  the  box,  he  could  not  be  hurt.  This  corresponds 
with  the  safety  found  in  laying  hold  of  the  horns  of  the  Israelite 
altar. 

Land. — In  the  earlier  history  of  the  Israelites  there  could  be 
no  individual  property  in  land — it  belonged  to  the  clan,  as  it  did 
among  the  Indians.  After  arriving  at  sedentary  and  national  life 
the  Israelites  found  it  expedient  to  permit  a  compromise  between 


36 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


the  penimncnt  poHHcssioii  of  land  by  the  clan  Riwl  a  riKh*^.  of  indi- 
vidual occupancy  for  jjcriods  Huthciieiit  to  offer  a  i)r<)iH'r  stimulus 
for  iniprovonicuts.  This  was  douo  by  the  institution  of  the  8al)- 
batical  year  or  the  year  of  jul)ilee.  The  Indians,  not  having 
reached  the  true  Hedentary  stage  (except  in  rare  instances),  were 
not  obliged  to  invent  that  device.  Thus  it  holds  true  among  both 
peoples  that  no  man  ccnild  accjuire  an  absolute  property  in  land. 
The  estate  was  not  in  him  but  in  his  clan. 

Forbidden  Food. — The  Indians  long  observed  a  prohibition 
against  killing  or  eating  any  part  of  the  animal  connected  with 
their  totem.  For  instance,  most  of  the  southern  Indians  abstained 
from  killing  the  wolf;  the  Navajo  do  not  kill  bears;  the  Osage 
never  killed  the  beaver  until  the  skins  became  valuable  for  sale. 
Afterward  some  of  the  animals  j)reviously  held  sacred  were 
killed ;  but  apologies  were  made  to  them  at  the  time,  and  in  al- 
most all  cases  a  particular  ceremony  was  ob.served  with  regard 
to  certain  parts  of  thcjse  animals  which  were  Tiot  to  be  used  for  food 
on  tlie  principle  of  synecdoche,  the  temptation  to  use  the  food  being 
too  strong  to  permit  entire  abstinence.  The  Cheroki  forbade  the 
nse  of  the  tongues  of  the  deer  and  bear  for  food.  They  cut  these 
members  out  and  cast  them  into  the  fire  sacramentally.  A  prac- 
tice reported  this  year  as  still  existing  among  the  Ojibwa  is  in 
point,  though  with  instructive  variation.  There  is  a  formal  re- 
striction against  members  of  the  bear  clan  eating  the  animal,  yet 
by  a  subdivision  within  the  same  clan  an  arrangement  is  made  so 
that  sub-clans  may  among  them  eat  the  whole  animal.  When  a 
bear  is  kille'l,  the  head  and  paws  are  eaten  by  those  who  form 
one  branch  of  the  bear  totem,  and  the  remainder  is  reserved  for 
the  others.  Other  Indians  have  invented  a  differentiation  in  which 
some  clansmen  may  eat  the  ham  and  not  the  shoulder  of  certain 
animals,  and  others  the  shoulder  and  not  the  ham. 

The  Egyptians  did  not  allow  the  eating  of  animals  that  bore 
wool.  This  prohibition  has  been  attributed  to  the  sacred  char- 
acter of  the  sphinx,  and  it  has  other  religious  connections.  It  is 
supposed  by  some  writers  that  the  legislation  of  Moses  with  refer- 
ence to  forbidden  food  was  aimed  to  antagonize  social  union  with 
the  Egyptians  by  prohibiting  to  the  Israelites  edibles  generally 
used  by  the  Egyptians,  and  vice  versd.  It  is  true  that  some  kinds 
of  food  forbidden  to  one  of  these  nations  were  allowed  to  the  other, 
but  the  rule  was  not  general,  and  in  particular  the  abstinence  of 
both  peoples  from  swine  is  inconsistent  with  the  hypothesis.  A 
more  conclusive  criticism  is  that  the  legislation  so  interpreted 
would  have  been  too  late  for  application.  The  Israelites  had  left 
Egypt  before  even  the  alleged  time  of  its  promulgation. 

The  survival  of  totemism  may  be  inferred  from  the  lists  of 
forbidden  food  in  Leviticus  xi  and  Deuteronomy  xiv.     It  would 


ISRAKLITE  AND   INDIAN. 


37 


nppcar  that  about  Lho  f inio  of  tlm  exoduH  tho  Israelites  worci  or- 
^.uii/i)(l  oil  tho  hiisis  of  fiitnilics  or  clans  tracing  tlirouj^'h  fcmalo 
litios,  and  named  Hezir  (swine),  Aclibor  (mouse),  Aiah  (kite), 
Arod  (wild  ass),  Sliai)lian  (coney),  and  soon.  Each  of  the  clanH 
refrained  from  eating  the  totem  animal,  or  oidy  ate  it  sacrament- 
ally.  Ah  tho  totemic  organization  decdined,  the  origin  of  tho 
abstinence  wcmid  be  lost,  but  tho  custom  lasted,  and  when  tho 
legislation  was  oodilied  it  was  incorporated  in  the  code.  Tho 
liyi)othesis  would  <>xphiin  certain  anomalies  in  the  list  —  e.g., 
coney,  or  rock  badger,  for  which  no  other  «'xplanation  deserving 
attention  has  been  givon.  The  division  into  (dean  and  unclean 
food  by  tho  two  tests  of  cloven  foot  and  nuTiiiiation  was  a  later 
induction  from  tho  animals  regardetl  as  tabu.  This  is  confirmed 
by  the  want  of  ai;y  systemization  in  tho  list  of  birds  given  in  Le- 
viticus. 

It  would  accord  with  other  examples  in  totomism  tluit  animal 
names  connected  with  the  animal  worship  before  mentioned  should 
bo  adopted  by  clans,  and  by  individual  men  among  the  Israelites. 
There  is  some  evidence  that  men,  bearing  a  common  animal  stock 
name,  thou^'h  in  dift'ennit  tribes  or  nations,  recognized  a  unity  of 
stock.  Our  most  definite  information  on  tho  subject  is  deiived 
frcnn  Ezokiel  viii,  which  indicates  that  tho  head  of  each  house 
acted  as  priest,  the  family  or  clan  images,  whicli  are  the  objects 
of  idolatry, being  tho.se  of  "unclean"  reptiles  or  quadrupeds — i.e., 
those  which  are  prohibited  from  use  as  food.  Although  the  whole 
inference  of  Prof.  Smith  on  this  subject  is  not  admitted  by  Dr. 
Jacol)s,  his  objection  is  to  tho  survival,  not  to  tho  early  existence, 
of  the  cult. 

No  satisfactory  explanation  of  the  Israelite  division  between 
clean  ant'  unclean  animals,  apart  from  that  afforded  by  tlio 
totemic  system,  has  hitherto  been  made.  No  rational  motive 
can  be  assigned  for  tho  avoidance  of  certain  animals,  in  them- 
selves hygienically  good.  The  explanation  that  swine's  flesh  was 
liable  to  bring  disease,  and  therefore  was  prohibited  for  a  sanitary 
reason  only,  covers  but  a  small  })art  of  the  subject  and  is  not  in 
itself  satisfactory.  The  meat  of  the  hog  is,  in  fact,  as  wliolesome 
in  Syria  as  it  is  in  Cincinnati, and  tlie  discovery  of  trichinosis  had 
certainly  not  been  made  in  thi^  timers  under  consideration.  The 
avoidance  of  all  meat,  indeed  of  all  food,  for  purposes  of  fasting 
and  producing  ecstasy,  is  in  a  different  category  and  has  already 
been  mentioned. 

Marriage. — The  laws  of  marriage  in  the  stage  of  barbarism 
are  intricate,  but  attention  may  be  directed  to  a  f(>w  points  which 
strongly  distinguish  them  from  tho  marriage  laws  of  civilization. 
Their  most  general  characteristic  is  the  regulation  of  marriage 
within  strict  limits  of  conventional  kinship. 


^ 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


The  levirate,  named  from  the  word  levir,  a  husband's  brother, 
is  in  brief  the  customary  right  and  obligation  combined  of  a 
brother — normally  the  eldest  surviving  brother — to  marry  the 
widow  of  his  deceased  brother.  Prof.  E.  B.  Tylor  reports  that 
this  law  appears  among  one  hundred  and  twenty  peoples — i.  e., 
in  about  one  in  three  of  the  distinct  peoples  of  the  world.  It  was 
almost  universal  among  the  Indians,  sometimes  with  additional 
duties  and  privileges.  A  widow,  as  a  rule,  could  not  marry  any 
one  but  her  deceased  husband's  brother  except  on  his  refusing  to 
marry  her,  nor  until  after  a  long  time  of  mourning,  or  more  prop- 
erly of  ordeal,  after  which  she  could  be  freed  from  the  tabu. 

In  several  tribes  marrying  an  elder  sister  gave  to  the  husband 
rights  over  all  the  other  sisters  of  the  wife,  Sometimes  the  son- 
in-law,  especially  when  he  married  the  eldest  daughter,  became 
entitled  to  all  the  younger  sisters  of  his  wife  at  his  option.  Other 
men  could  not  take  them  except  with  his  formal  consent.  This 
right  of  the  son-in-law  to  all  the  unmarried  younger  sisters  some- 
times continued  after  the  death  of  the  first  wife.  Not  unfrequent- 
ly  a  man  married  a  widow  and  her  daughters  at  the  same  time. 

Among  the  Israelites  it  was  common  to  have  several  wives  of 
equal  status,  who  often  were  sisters.  A  widow  had  a  right  to  ap- 
peal to  her  brother-in-law,  or  some  member  of  her  husband's  fam- 
ily, to  provide  her  with  a  second  husba,nd,  and  an  evasion  of  the 
duty  in  personam  was  a  gross  offense.  Deuteronomy  xxv  shows 
the  degrading  terms  of  the  formality  by  which  alone  the  brother- 
in-law  could  be  freed  from  the  obligations  of  marriage  and  the 
widow  be  allowed  to  marry  another  man.  Judah  admitted  that 
Ta.nar's  conduct  was  perfectly  correct.  It  was  but  a  legitimate 
extension  of  the  levirate  law. 

There  is  the  clear  statement  in  Leviticus  that  the  Egyptians 
and  the  Canaanites  formed  such  marriages  as  were  in  accordance 
with  the  totemic  system,  but  which  were  made  incestuous  by  the 
Israelite  law.  The  laws  of  incest  given  in  Leviticus  are  probably 
later  than  the  code  of  Deuteronomy,  in  which  the  prohibition  is 
directed  against  marriage  by  a  man  with  his  father's  wife.  Tliat 
precept  denounces  the  practice  in  Arabia  by  which  the  son  inher- 
ited his  father's  wife. 

In  the  framework  of  the  Deuteronomic  code  there  were  three 
incestuous  prohibitions,  viz.,  father's  wife,  sister,  and  wife's  mother. 
To  these  offenses  Ezekiel  adds  marriage  with  a  daughter-in-law. 
According  to  the  prophets,  all  those  forms  of  5?/06'i-incest  were 
practiced  in  Jerusalem ;  and  the  history  indicates  that  all  at  some 
time  were  recognized  customs.  The  taking  in  marriage  of  a 
father's  wife  was  not  wholly  obsolete  in  the  time  of  David. 

As  regards  the  Israelite  system  of  descent  in  the  female  line,  it 
may  be  noticed  that  the  children  of  Nahor  by  Milkah  were  dis- 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


tinguished  from  his  children  by  his  other  wives.  Rebekah's  de- 
scent is  practically  valued  as  descent  from  Milkah,and  the  family 
or  clan  connection  is  traced  entirely  through  Milkah  and  Sarah. 
Their  rules  of  kinship  regarding  what  we  now  call  incest  are  part- 
ly indicated  by  the  following  instances :  Moses'  father  married  his 
father's  sister;  Nahor  married  his  brother's  daughter ;  A-raham 
married  Sarah,  the  daughter  of  his  father  but  not  of  his  mother. 

A  passage  in  Judges  relates  to  exogamy,  recording  that  Ibzan 
had  thirty  sons,  and  also  thirty  daughters  whom  he  sent  abroad, 
and  took  thirty  daughters  from  abroad  for  his  sons.  But  exogamy 
could  not  be  kept  up  after  the  Israelites  had  become  mainly  an 
agricultural  people,  and  in  the  times  of  the  kings  only  survivals 
of  it  remained. 

Mr.  John  Fenton,  in  "  Early  Hebrew  Life,"  makes  some  acute 
remarks  upon  the  story  of  Lot's  daughters,  but  he  did  not  exhaust 
the  subject.  According  to  the  clan  system,  it  was  not  only  proper 
for  Lot  to  marry  his  daughters,  but  under  the  circumstances  it  was 
obligatory  upon  him  to  do  so.  The  logical  propriety  of  the  mar- 
riage of  a  father  to  his  daughters,  on  the  ground  that  they  did  not 
belong  to  the  same  clan,  is  clear,  and  the  practice  exists  to-day 
among  a  number  of  the  tribes  of  Indians  not  much  affected  by  Eu- 
ropean intercourse.  A  father  was  not  of  kin  to  his  own  children. 
They  belonged  to  the  mother's  clan,  and  not  to  his.  An  interest- 
ing example  of  this  clan  law  is  furnished  by  Dr.  George  M.  Daw- 
son as  still  existing  among  tribes  of  British  Columbia.  A  certain 
rich  Indian  would  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  search  for  his  aged 
father,  who  was  lost  and  starving  in  the  mountains.  He  did  not 
count  his  father  as  a  relative,  and  said,  "  Let  his  people  go  in 
search  of  him."  Yet  that  son  was  regarded  as  a  particularly  good 
Indian. 

There  are  other  instances  in  which  the  son  would  fight  against 
the  father  to  the  death.  Such  cases  would  occur  where,  according 
to  the  obligations  of  clan  law,  a  son  married  a  woman  of  a  clan 
other  than  that  of  his  father  and  went  to  live  with  her  people ;  and 
when  there  was  warfare  between  her  clan  and  that  of  his  father, 
the  son  was  by  association  expected  to  fight  against  his  father. 
The  real  tie  of  blood  gave  no  reason  why  he  should  not  be  alien 
and  antagonistic  to  his  father  and  his  father's  clan. 

But  it  is  true  that,  in  many  tribes  of  Indians,  since  they  have 
been  observed  by  Europeans,  the  marriage  of  father  and  daughter 
has  been  very  rare.  It  may  be  suggested  as  a  reason  that  a  grad- 
ual change  has  occurred  from  the  mother-right  to  the  father- 
right,  in  which  the  attitude  is  reversed ;  but  practically  the  fact 
that,  by  treating  the  daughter  as  an  object  of  value  or  merchan- 
dise, either  the  father  or  mother  could  secure  presents  from  the 
suitor,  naturally  tended  to  break  down  this  part  of  the  clan  mar- 


40 


ISRAELITK  AND  INDIAN. 


riago  system  before  any  other,  and,  the  custom  ceasing,  the  prac- 
tice became  wrong.  So  it  is  true  to-day  among  Indians,  as  it  was 
in  a  much  more  marked  degree  among  the  Israelites  at  the  time  of 
the  compilation  of  the  existing  version  of  the  Old  Testament,  that 
the  marriage  of  a  father  and  daughter  is  reprobated.  In  this  con- 
nection it  is  instructive  to  notice  that  the  Navajo  have  a  myth, 
undoubtedly  genuine;  that  in  the  old  time  one  of  their  race  took 
his  daughter  to  wife,  and  their  offspring  became  the  ancestor  of 
the  Utes,  the  hereditary  enemies  of  the  Navajo.  This  is  a  parallel 
with  the  stigma  inflicted  upon  the  Moabites  and  Ammonites,  who 
were  the  descendants  of  Lot  and  the  enemies  of  the  Israelites  who 
wrote  the  history,  but  yet  were  recognized  by  the  latter  as  of  the 
same  stock. 

The  part  of  the  story  of  Lot  as  it  appears  in  our  version, 
which  tends  strongly  to  show  its  later  manipulation,  is  that  the 
authors  of  that  version,  having  at  that  time  the  idea  of  a  hor- 
rible incest,  explained  that  the  man,  specially  designated  by  tra- 
dition as  eminently  good,  was  guilty  only  because  he  was  betrayed 
through  intoxication.  They  were  obliged,  in  accordance  with  one 
tradition,  to  make  him  the  ancestor  of  Moab  and  Ammon.  By 
another  tradition  he  was  left  without  any  sons  and  no  wife, 
the  two  daughters  being  all  of  his  family  who  survived  the 
destruction  of  Sodom.  They  reconciled  their  data,  therefore,  by  , 
the  excuse  of  intoxication,  but  there  was  no  occasion  for  such 
excuse.  In  the  age  to  which  the  tradition  related  the  transaction 
was  perfectly  proper,  did  not  involve  sexual  passion,  and  was 
required  by  law  to  keep  up  the  stock.  The  clan  rules  had  been 
forgotten  when  the  book  of  Genesis  was  written. 

In  the  stage  of  barbarism  the  marriage  of  brother  and  sister 
was  common  all  over  the  world.  Where  polygamy  existed,  as 
was  the  case  omong  the  Israelites,  and  probably  among  all  the 
Indians,  a  man,  according  to  the  rules  of  the  totemic  system,  could 
not  marry  into  his  own  clan.  If  he  took  several  wives,  they 
would  sometimes  be  of  different  clans,  not  only  from  his  own,  but 
from  one  another.  In  such  cases,  the  child  of  the  wife  of  clan  A 
was  not  of  the  same  clan  as  the  child  of  the  wife  of  clan  B,  and 
they  could  marry.  The  marriage  of  uterine  brothers  and  sisters 
was  not  consistent  with  the  clan  rules. 

Writers  on  the  clan  system  have  extolled  it  as  a  system  show- 
ing profound  physiological  insight  respecting  the  supposed  evils 
of  inbreeding;  but  the  best  and  latest  physiologists  doubt  whether 
inbreeding  is  bad,  unless  there  is  a  taint  of  blood  which  should 
prohibit  the  marriage  of  either  partj'^  to  any  one.  A  true  under- 
standing of  the  clan  system  would  have  shown  that  inasmuch  as 
it  certainly  permitted  marriage  between  a  man  and  his  half-sister, 
and  between  a  man  and  his  aunt,  his  father's  sister,  if  not  the 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


4» 


more  violent  case  of  marriage  between  fatlier  and  daughter,  it  did 
not  accomplish  that  for  which  it  has  been  so  highly  praised. 

The  late  prohibition  of  a  man's  marriage  to  his  deceased  wife's 
sister  can  not  be  successfully  defended  on  any  principle  of  physi- 
ology or  sociology.  It  is  a  blunder  that  perhaps  arose  in  the 
transition  stage  from  the  matriarchate  to  the  patriarchate  method. 

Conclusions. — The  Indians  have  been  characterized  as  pe- 
culiar among  the  races  of  men.  One  school  of  writers  has  pro- 
nounced them  to  be  fercB  natures,,  and  wholly  incapable  of  receiv- 
ing civilization.  Others  have  held  the  opposite  view,  that  they 
were  eminently  spiritualistic,  as  was  proved  by  their  having  pre- 
served the  pure  pristine  faith  to  a  degree  beyond  all  other  se- 
cluded peoples.  Both  of  these  assertions  are  disproved.  When 
Indians  have  been  allowed  reasonable  opportunities,  they  have 
advanced  in  civilization,  and  have  thriven  under  it.  While  their 
religion  may  in  one  sense  be  pristine,  it  does  not  differ  materially 
from  that  found  in  many  other  regions. 

The  peculiarity  of  the  Semites,  and  especially  of  that  branch 
of  them  lately  styled  the  Syro-Aramseans  (which  is  only  an  ethno- 
graphic name  including  the  Israelites),  has  been  accepted  as  an 
axiom.  It  was  pronounced  that  they  were  specially  adapted  to  a 
spiritual  religion ;  that  whether  through  an  exclusive  revelation, 
or  because  their  racial  constitution  was  exceptionally  receptive  to 
such  revelation,  their  idiosyncrasy  disposed  them  readily  to  spir- 
itual ideas,  which  to  modern  minds  means  monotheism.  This  is 
not  the  record  of  the  historical  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  even 
after  their  manipulation.  The  prophets  of  Israel  declared  the 
exact  contrary ;  they  denounced  their  own  people  as  rejecting 
spiritual  truth,  and  as  not  deserving  the  favor  of  Jahveh. 

The  historical  books  of  Israel  which  we  possess  are  not  his- 
torical records,  but  are  historic  legends  reduced  to  writing  by 
writers  who  had  sometimes  political  and  sometimes  religious  ends 
in  view.  The  argument  of  those  tales  is  that  all  the  people  habit- 
ually worshiped  Jahveh,  and  him  alone,  during  which  normal 
period  they  were  prosperous,  but  that  sometimes  under  evil  influ- 
ence they  abandoned  him  and  fell  into  disaster,  until,  after  suffi- 
cient chastisement,  they  returned  to  the  true  worship.  The  his- 
toric truth  is  that  the  old  Israelites,  when  disasters  came,  as  they 
always  do  come,  gave  up  the  worship  of  their  national  god  as 
not  a  success,  and  tried  the  gods  of  their  neighbors.  They  re- 
turned to  Jahveh  because  the  other  gods  did  not  satisfy  them  any 
better.  In  fact,  the  people  had  no  fixed  or  distinct  faith,  and  it 
is  not  correct  to  accuse  them  of  backsliding  when  they  were  only 
vacillating. 

The  prophets  tried  to  pull  the  Israelites  too  rapidly  through 


4a 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


the  zootheistic  and  physitheistic  stages  into  monotheism,  and 
spasmodically  succeeded ;  but  the  body  of  the  people  never 
reached  the  stage  of  monotheism  until  after  the  Babylonian  cap- 
tivity. Most  writers  have  explained  this  on  the  theory  that  the 
terrible  chastisement  of  that  captivity  finally  brought  them  to 
submission;  but  it  is  more  probable  that  their  forced  relations 
with  their  more  cultured  conquerors  gave  them  new  ideas  never 
before  entertained,  which  infused  modifications  into  their  religion. 
The  resulting  combination  produced  those  characteristics  of  that 
religion  which  have  been  regarded  as  the  most  admirable. 

The  general  account  of  the  Israelite  lapses  is  not  unlike  that 
given  in  modern  times  by  missionaries,  who  also  have  been  im- 
petuous in  attempting  the  instantaneous  transport  of  Indians 
through  stages  that  are  marked  by  ages.  Tribes  of  Indians  have 
been  converted,  and  they  were  reported  and  recorded  as  being  in 
that  permanent  condition.  A  few  j'^ears  later,  from  some  dissatis- 
faction, they  returned  to  their  shaman  and  their  dreams,  which 
return  was  then  reported  as  a  lapse.  It  was  not,  in  fact,  a  lapse, 
but  the  claim  that  they  had  been  converted  was  premature.  There 
is,  however,  this  distinction  between  the  Israelites  and  the  In- 
dians :  that  the  former  were  allowed  to  return  to  Palestine  and 
carry  out  their  old  ideas  with  improvements  ;  while  the  Indians, 
remaining  under  the  same  foreign  influences  and  continually 
growing  weaker,  were  forced  to  abandon  all  their  faith  and  to 
accept  that  of  their  conquerors  without  composition. 

The  stories  of  the  conversion  of  Indians  by  thousands  would 
seem  false  to  one  who  did  not  know  that  they  were  ready  to  be- 
lieve any  new  thing  because  they  before  had  no  fixed  belief.  The 
record  of  the  Israelites  is  not  so  clear,  because  old ;  but  they  surely 
adopted  the  Satanic  doctrine  and  the  "Mosaic  cosmology,"  and 
continued  adopting  foreign  beliefs  until  a  late  date  in  their  his- 
tory. 

The  most  judicious  remarks  ever  made  l)y  missionaries  were 
those  of  the  Rev.  Messrs.  D.  Lee  and  J.  H.  Frost,  M'ho,  after  ten 
years  in  Oregon  of  what  has  been  considered  successful  work,  an- 
nounced their  abandonment  of  their  former  tenet  that  if  the  hea- 
then were  converted  to  Christianity  civilization  followed  of  course. 
They  confessed  that  civilization  must  begin  before  Christianity 
could  even  be  understood.  Acute  trf'elers  throughout  the  world 
have  perceived  the  same  fact ;  and  it  is  not  a  too  violent  simile  to 
say  that  Christianity,  belonging  to  the  plane  of  civilization  and  to 
that  only,  sits  on  a  savage  or  barbarian  as  a  bishop's  mitre  would 
on  a  naked  Hottentot. 

The  Israelites  were  not  suddenly  lifted  from  their  barbarian 
condition.  It  was  not  possible.  As  regards  the  culture  strata 
we  may  take  a  lesson  from  geology.    Coal  is  not  found  in  the  Si- 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


^% 


lurian  formation,  therefore  wise  miners  do  not  look  there  for  coal. 
The  higher  mammals  are  not  found  eai'll.er  than  the  Cenozoie, 
though  their  precursors  are  in  the  Jurassic.  Man  in  the  savage 
stage  may  be  examined  in  the  same  spirit  as  the  Jurassic  stage  is 
studied  to  trace  what  may  afterward  appear  in  the  barbarian  and 
Cenozoie,  and  is  developed  in  the  present  epoch ;  but  to  search 
for  the  complete  ideas  of  civilization  in  the  period  of  barbarism 
would  be  as  judicious  as  to  dig  for  manuscripts  among  the  work- 
shops of  flint  arrow-heads. 

The  beliefs  and  practices  of  both  the  Israelites  and  the  Indians 
were  substantially  the  same  as  those  of  other  bodies  of  peojjle  in 
the  same  stage  of  culture.  They  were  neither  of  them  a  "  pecul- 
iar "  people. 

There  is,  racially,  no  peculiar  people  in  the  sense  intended. 
Mankind  is  homogeneous  in  nature,  though  its  divisions  at  any 
one  time  are  found  in  differing  and  advancing  grades  of  culture. 
Such  advancement  has  been  from  causes  known  to  be  still  in  con- 
tinuous operation.  What  is  called  blood  in  a  racial  sense  may 
be  likened  unto  the  water  of  the  earth  :  as  the  water  comes  from 
the  clouds  it  is  chemically  the  same,  and  it  is  subjected,  wherever 
it  is,  to  the  same  laws.  The  early  course  of  a  rill  may  be  turned 
by  a  pebble,  and  from  the  elevations  and  depressions  met  it  may 
become  a  lake,  or  a  river,  or  a  stagnant  marsh.  From  the  charac- 
ter of  soil  encountered  it  may  be  clear  or  muddy,  alkaline,  chalyb- 
eate, or  sulphurous.  In  one  sense,  which  belongs  to  modern  and 
not  to  ancient  history,  the  Jews  are  a  peculiar  people,  from  the 
fact  that  for  many  centuries,  until  lately,  they  proclaimed  them- 
selves to  be  such,  and  observed  religiously  the  doctrine  about  the 
Goira,  and  therefore  did  not  intermarry  with  other  peoples ;  but 
that  should  not  be  a  reason  for  their  boasting.  Persecution  made 
them  pariahs  and  other  peoples  would  not  intermarry  with  them. 
During  recent  centuries  the  so-styled  purity  of  their  race  has 
been  kept  up  by  isolation,  but  the  assumption  of  great  purity  in 
the  stock  at  the  Christian  era  is  not  tenable.  Now  that  their 
prejudices  and  those  of  the  Goim  against  them  are  dissolving,  it 
is  probable  that  what  has  been  improperly  called  the  Jewish  i-ace 
will  disappear  by  absorption  as  the  Indians  are  now  disappearing. 
To  renew  the  simile,  both  Israelite  and  Indian  will  be  lost  in  the 
homogeneous  ocean  which  all  mankind  seems  destined  to  swell. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  this  presentation  of  views  practically 
ignores  the  scholastic  divisions  of  mankind  into  distinct  races. 
The  result  of  my  own  studies  on  the  subject  is  a  conviction  that 
all  attempts  at  the  classification  of  races  have  failed.  The  best 
statement  of  the  condition  of  scientific  opinion  regarding  such 
classification  may  be  taken  from  the  address  of  Prof.  W.  H.  Flow- 
er to  the  Section  of  Anthropology  of  the  British  Association  for 

VOL.  XXXVI. — 14 


44 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


the  Advancement  of  Science.  He  says :  "  I  am  compelled  to  U86 
the  word  race  vaguely  for  any  considerable  group  of  men  who 
resemble  each  other  in  certain  common  characters  transmitted 
from  generation  to  generation."  Some  satisfactory  solution  of 
the  problem  may  be  made  in  the  future,  but  for  the  present  the 
most  useful  direction  of  the  work  of  anthropologists  is  not  in  at- 
tempts to  establish  racial  divisions,  but  in  the  determination  of 
the  several  planes  of  culture  with  recognition  of  specific  environ- 
ments. 

A  rabbinical  legend  tells  that  Lot  was  the  first  to  argue  the 
existence  of  one  god  ruling  the  universe,  from  the  irregular  phe- 
nomena observed  or  1(»:  id  sea  and  among  the  heavenly  bodies. 
"  If  these  had  power  of  ttejr  own,"  he  said,  "  they  would  have  had 
regular  motions,  but  as  they  had  no  regularity  they  were  subserv- 
ient to  the  occasional  exercise  of  a  higher  will."  In  times  of 
greater  scientific  knowledge  these  supposed  irregular  motions  are 
found  to  be  in  accordar  ' '.  ""aws  considered  to  be  permanent, 

if  not  immutable,  and  the  ':^x"  Tuition  of  such  tremendous  laws 
gives  a  higher  conception  r  F  cL*  ai'  maker.  The  notion  that  such 
laws  are  or  can  be  ^nspend^d  orvk-lfcCtnl  i.-!uggests  irresolution  and 
caprice,  shocks  human  rea,i. :  ■.  i  nd  (.;•  :he  :;lory  of  divinity. 

The  doctrine  attributed  to  Lot  ji-  .  •■'.  '8,  because  the  con- 

ception of  nature  implied  in  it  permeated  ail  Ibe  early  philosophy. 
We  now  define  a  miracle  specifically  as  a  deviation  from  the  laws 
of  nature.  But  to  those  for  whom  nature  had  no  laws,  the  prime 
definition  as  "  the  wonderful "  was  alone  correct.  A  supernatural 
being  could  do  anything  whatever  in  accordance  with  his  arbi- 
trary will,  and  was  expected  to  act  in  that  manner.  Men  who 
were  inspired  or  empowered  by  the  supernatural  were  also  expect- 
ed, indeed  were  required,  to  work  wonders.  It  would  hardly  be  a 
paradox  to  assert  that  only  the  supernatural  was  natural,  and  that 
only  the  irregular  was  regular. 

That  both  the  Indians  and  the  Israelites  were  in  this  stage  of 
philosophy  has  been  conclusively  shown.  It  is  also  evident  that 
the  principle  of  ancientism  was  potent  in  their  religion. 

Ancientism,  which  still  has  surviving  influence,  declares  the 
old  thought,  that  of  the  ancient  men,  to  be  always  the  best.  This 
is  false,  unless  the  theory  is  true  that  all  knowledge  comes  from 
revelation,  which  was  given  only  to  the  ancient  men,  who  there- 
fore had  it  in  its  pure  condition.  To  cling  to  the  old  merely  be- 
cause it  is  old  is  bad ;  in  fact,  is  the  crudest  superstition.  Some 
advocates  of  the  old  reject  all  new  thoughts,  but  the  more  intelli- 
gent of  its  praisers  seek  to  force  a  reconciliation  between  the  old 
thought  and  the  new.  What  th»y  now  believe  must  be  right. 
What  they  are  not  accustomed  to  is  shocking,  and  therefore 
wrong.    So  the  old,  which  was  always  right,  must  be  distorted  so 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


m 


as  to  comprehend  in  it  the  now,  which  is  also  right,  and  whatever 
there  is  of  the  old  that  can  not  be  managed  otherwise  must  be  ex- 
plained away. 

There  is  an  apparent  exception  in  favor  of  the  old  thoughts 
and  teachings  where  there  has  been  a  general  degradation  in  cult- 
ure ;  then  a  return  to  the  results  of  the  former  and  forgotten 
culture  is  most  desirable.  This  is  illustrated  in  the  revival  of  the 
old  learning  after  the  dark  ages  in  Europe,  when  the  classic  writ- 
ings as  discovered  brought  fresh  illumination  to  the  world.  But 
this  was  simply  a  resumption  of  advance  after  a  check ;  and  the 
wisdom  of  the  ancients,  which  has  appeared  marvelous,  owes 
much  of  its  splendor  to  the  intervening  darkness.  The  process  of 
development,  not  chronology,  makes  a  proper  criterion.  Though 
antiquitas  sceculi  juventus  mundi,  the  archaic  is  that  which  relates 
to  the  earliest  steps  of  human  advance.  We  have  the  history  of 
the  Israelites  for  forty  centuries  ;  we  have  that  of  the  Indians  for 
little  more  than  three  centuries ;  and,  though  the  Israelites  in  re- 
corded times  advanced  beyond  the  plane  of  the  Indians,  who  shall 
say  which  of  the  two  peoples  is  in  years  the  older  ? 

The  points  before  mentioned — that  neither  the  Israelites  nor 
the  Indians  had  any  formulated  and  established  faith,  and  in  par- 
ticular did  not  believe  in  a  single  god,  and  that  they  did  not  have 
any  system  of  rewards  and  punishments  after  death — had  impor- 
tant consequences.  They  were  never  persecutors  for  religious 
opinion.  With  regard  to  the  Indians  that  assertion  will  at  once 
be  admitted ;  with  regard  to  the  Israelites  it  will  be  disputed  by 
those  who  take  the  statements  of  the  compilers  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment as  literally  historical. 

I  have  before  mentioned  one  reason,  that  of  the  amalgamation 
of  the  Israelites  with  the  inhabitants  of  Canaan,  why  there  could 
not  have  been  any  such  fanatic  massacre  as  is  narrated.  There 
are  other  potent  reasons.  This  plane  of  culture  of  the  Israelites 
being  established,  it  is  proper  theoretically  to  make  the  deduc- 
tions belonging  to  that  plane.  The  Indians  carefully  concealed 
their  special  mystery-daimons.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  Israel- 
ites were  generally  in  accord  with  their  neighbors  in  religious 
opinions  and  practices,  so  there  could  have  been  no  antagonism 
from  religious  motives.  If  while  worshiping  Jahveh  they  made 
war  for  any  reason,  Jahveh  was  their  reliance,  and  he  conquered 
or  was  defeated  with  them  ;  but  they  did  not  make  war  to  force 
the  worship  of  Jahveh  upon  others.  They  would  have  regarded 
that  as  the  worst  possible  policy,  as  it  would  have  allowed  their 
enemies  to  pirate  upon  their  divine  monopoly  which  was  the 
essential  part  of  their  military  equipment. 

When  men  live  in  the  midst  of  many  religions,  which  imply 
many  revelations,  they  are  charitable  to  all  of  them.    It  is  only 


46 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


the  isolated  and  ignorant  who  are  bigoted.  A  still  higher  degree 
of  light  gained  by  those  who  have  come  out  of  the  caves  of  super- 
stition will  induce  them  to  imitate  the  decision  of  the  witty  sage 
with  regard  to  ghosts — he  had  seen  so  many  that  he  could  not  be- 
lieve in  any. 

When  a  future  state  of  rewards  and  punishments,  depending 
upon  belief  in  a  particular  dogma,  has  been  established,  the  atti- 
tude of  believers  becomes  antagonistic.  They  maintain  that  a 
denial  of  their  belief  is  disrespect  to  their  god,  and  they  angrily 
stigmatize  such  denial  as  blasphemy  or  skepticism,  or  use  some 
other  term  of  vituperation,  and  they  say  that  their  anger  is  right- 
eous. But  it  is  simply  egotistic.  The  tru'^  ground  of  their  hos- 
tility to  any  dissentient  opinion  is  the  cloua  cast  on  their  title  to 
future  happiness.  This  must  be  fought  as  titles  are  contested  in 
courts  of  law,  or  by  the  last  resort  of  war,  or  by  such  persecution 
as  silences  the  objectors  to  the  title.  But  as  the  Israelites  claimed 
no  such  title,  they  were  not  sensitive  about  its  disparagement. 
In  the  religious  stage  described,  neither  the  Indians  nor  the  Is- 
raelites sought  to  make  religious  proselytes.  The  noble  motive 
of  missionaries  is  to  save  souls ;  but  the  peoples  now  compared 
could  not  have  had,  indeed  could  not  have  understood,  that  motive. 

At  the  commencement  of  this  address  the  rule  was  laid  down 
that  it  was  essential  to  omit  all  reference  to  revelation  as  de- 
ciding the  points  discussed.  Many  points,  however,  have  been 
touched  upon  which  properly  bring  to  notice  the  order  of  the 
development  of  revelation  in  general,  without  discussion  of  its 
decisive  authority.  This  procedure  may  be  submitted  to  students 
of  anthropology  as  applicable  to  all  revelations  save  those  which 
each  one  individually  credits. 

It  is  evident  that  some  practice  existed  early  for  which  a  natu- 
ral explanation  may  be  given.  This  practice  became  a  formal 
custom  which,  after  a  time,  was  considered  to  be  obligatory  under 
the  vague  but  compelling  idea  that  it  was  "  bad  luck  "  not  to  ob- 
serve it.  Bad  luck  is  necessarily  connected  with  the  supernatu- 
ral. Hence  the  custom  or  the  congeries  of  customs  became  a 
religion,  and  that  was  always  supported  and  explained  at  a  later 
time  by  a  myth.  That  was  not  necessarily  an  explanation  made 
by  imposture  or  with  intent  to  deceive,  but  grew  from  the  curi- 
osity of  men  and  their  hurry  to  account  for  everything.  All 
such  myths  are  declared  to  be  obtained,  through  revelation,  from 
a  power  higher  than  man.  The  result  is,  therefore,  that  revela- 
tion, which  is  the  last  step  in  the  evolution  of  religion,  is  enounced, 
by  antedating,  to  be  the  first  step.  When  supposed  revelation  is 
once  regnant,  men  cling  to  it  as  a  refuge  from  the  doubt  which 
must  always  result  from  reasoning  on  subjects  which  do  not  ad- 
mit of  demonstration.    Such  clinging  becomes  fanatical  with  most 


ISRAELITE  AND  INDIAN. 


47 


men  because  they  dread  as  the  greatest  calamity  to  be  cast  into  the 
hands  of  Giant  Doubting,  who  to  them  is  but  another  name  for 
Giant  Despair.    But  the  path  of  Doubt  leads  to  the  portal  of  Truth. 

It  has  been  no  part  of  my  purpose  in  this  address  to  impugn 
the  character  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament.  On  the  con- 
trary, I  regard  that  noble  work  as  the  most  important  anthro- 
pologic record  possessed  by  man — a  work  which  richly  repays 
the  most  diligent  study.  I  gladly  accept  it  as  a  genuine  record, 
and  believe  that,  though  it  has  been  colored  by  time  and  by  the 
work  of  designing  men,  it  was  never  invented.  It  is  sometimes 
said  that  persons  who  are  absorbed  in  scientific  studies  fear  or 
pretend  to  scorn  the  Bible.  I  neither  fear  nor  scorn  it.  I  admire 
it,  and  study  it,  and  gain  much  from  it ;  but  no  intelligent  person 
takes  as  of  the  same  authority  all  its  versions,  or,  indeed,  all  the 
contents  of  the  books  which  are  arbitrarily  styled  canonical,  and 
about  the  very  names  and  numbers  of  which  scholars,  churches, 
and  sects  dispute. 

The  Hexateuch  contains  that  intrinsic  evidence  of  truth  which 
so  impressed  the  Ojibwa  elders,  before  mentioned,  who  said  that 
the  work  was  true  because  they  and  their  fathers  "  had  heard  the 
same  stories  since  the  world  was  new."  To  those  who  can  read  it 
understandingly  it  is  a  true  story  of  a  plane  of  culture. 

"  Now  as  to  myself  I  have  so  described  these  matters  as  I  have 
found  them  and  read  them ;  but,  if  any  one  is  inclined  to  another 
opinion  about  them,  let  him  enjoy  his  different  sentiments  without 
any  blame  from  me." 


